V. 


I/rREARY 


Theological   Seminary, 

,'INCETON,    N.  J. 

Case,  Divi. "LS^V&.O.... 

Shelf,  Section.4ij(fi  5.   

Boo!,.  N.9........ 


-CQ-p-Nj 


V 


\ 


BLOT'S  COINCIDENCES 


AND 


PALET'S  H0E.E  PAULD'H 


COMPLETE    IN   ONE   VOLUME. 


NEW    YORK: 
ROBERT   CARTER  &   BROTHERS, 

■  : .   2  5  5    BROADWAY. 

15-51. 


UNDESIGNED  COINCIDENCES 


IN    THE    WRITINGS    BOTH    OF 


THE   OLD   AND   NEW   TESTAMENTS, 


AN  ARGUMENT  OF  THEIR  VERACITY; 


WITH  AN  APPENDIX, 

CONTAINING  UNDESIGNED  COINCIDENCES  BETWEEN  THE  GOSPELS. 
AND  ACTS,  AND  JOSEPHUS. 


BY    THE 

REV.  J.  J.  BLUNT,  B.  D. 

MARGARET     PROFESSOR     OF     DIVDCITY,    CAMBRIDGE. 


NEW  YORK: 
ROBERT  CARTER  &  BROTHERS, 

No.  285    BROADWAY. 
1851. 


PREFACE. 


The  present  "Volume  is  a  republication,  with  corrections 
and  large  additions,  of  several  short  Works  which  I  printed 
a  few  years  ago  separately;  and  which,  having  passed 
through  more  or  fewer  editions,  have  become  out  of  print: 
I  have  thus  been  furnished  with  an  opportunity  of  revising 
and  consolidating  thorn.  These  works  were :  "  The  Ve- 
racity of  the  Books  of  Moses  ;"  "  The  Veracity  of  the  His- 
torical Scriptures  of  the  Old  Testament ;"  and  "  The  Ve- 
racity of  the  Gospels  and  Acts,"  argued  from  undesigned 
coincidences  to  be  found  in  them  when  compared  in  their 
several  parts ;  and  in  the  last  instance,  when  compared 
also  with  the  Writings  of  Josephus.  They  were  all  of 
them  originally  the  substance  of  Sermons  delivered  before 
the  University,  some  in  a  Course  of  Hulsean  Lectures, 
others  on  various  occasions.  And  though  two  of  them, 
the  Veracity  of  the  Books  of  Moses,  and  the  Veracity  of 
the  Gospels  and  Acts,  were  divested  of  the  form  of  Ser- 
mons before  publication  ;  the  third,  The  Veracity  of  the 
Historical  Scriptures  of  the  Old  Testament  (which  consti- 
tuted the  Hulsean  Lectures)  still  retained  it.  I  have 
thought  that  by  reducing  this  to  the  same  shape  as  the 
rest,  and  combining  it  with  them,  the  whole  would  present 
a  continued  argument,  or  rather  a  continued  series  of  in- 


IV  PREFACE. 

dependent  arguments,  for  the  Veracity  of  the  Scriptures, 
of  which  the  effect  would  be  greater  than  that  of  the 
separate  works  could  be,  which  might  be  read  perhaps  out 
of  the  natural  order,  and  which  were  not  altogether  uni- 
form in  their  plan.  But  as  this  test  of  veracity  proved  ap- 
plicable, though  in  a  less  degree,  for  reasons  I  have  as- 
signed elsewhere,  to  the  Prophetical  Scriptures  also,  I  have 
introduced  into  the  present  Volume  in  its  proper  place,  evi- 
dence of  the  same  kind  which  had  been  long  lying  by  me, 
for  the  Veracity  of  some  of  those  Writings  ;  thus  employ- 
ing one  and  the  same  touchstone  of  truth,  to  verify  suc- 
cessively the  Books  of  Moses,  the  Historical  Scriptures  of 
the  Old  Testament,  the  Prophetical,  and  the  Gospels  and 
Acts,  in  their  order. 

The  argument,  as  my  readers  will  of  course  be  aware, 
is  an  extension  of  that  of  the  Horce  Paulina,  and  which 
originated,  as  was  generally  supposed,  with  Dr.  Paley. 
But  Dr.  Turton,1  the  present  bishop  of  Ely,  has  rendered 
the  claims,  of  Dr.  Paley  to  the  first  conception  of  it  doubt- 
ful, by  producing  a  passage  from  the  conclusion  of  Dr. 
Doddridge's  Introduction  to  his  Paraphrase  and  Notes  on 
the  First  Epistle  to  the  Thessalonians,  to  the  following 
effect. 

"  Whoever  reads  over  St.  Paul's  Epistles  with  atten- 
tion will  discern  such  intrinsic  characters  in  their  genuine- 
ness, and  the  divine  authority  of  the  doctrines  they  con- 

1  In  his  "  Natural  Theology  considered  with  reference  to  Lord  Brougham's 
Discourse,"  &c.  p.  23. 


PREFACE.  V 

tain,  as  will  perhaps  produce  in  him  a  stronger  conviction 
than  all  the  external  evidence  with  which  they  are  attend- 
ed. To  which  we  may  add,  that  the  exact  coincidence  ob- 
servable between  the  many  allusions  to  particular  facts,  in 
this,  as  well  as  in  other  Ejnstlcs,  and  the  account  of  the 
facts  themselves  as  they  are  recorded  in  the  History  of  the 
Acts,  is  a  remarkable  confirmation  of  the  truth  of  each." 
Be  this  however  as  it  may.  Dr.  Paley  first  brought  the 
argument  to  light  in  support  of  the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul ; 
and  I  am  not  aware  that  it  has  since  been  deliberately  ap- 
plied to  any  other  of  the  sacred  books,  except  by  Dr.  Graves, 
in  two  of  his  Lectures  on  the  Pentateuch,  to  that  portion 
of  holy  writ.  Much,  however,  of  the  same  kind  of  testi- 
mony I  have  no  doubt  has  escaped  all  of  us  ;  and  still  re- 
mains to  be  detected  by  future  writers  on  the  Evidences. 
For  myself,  though  I  may  not  lay  claim  to  the  merit  (what- 
ever it  may  be)  of  actually  discovering  all  the  exanrbles  of 
consistency  without  contrivance,  which  I  shall  bring  for- 
ward in  this  volume, — indeed,  I  could  not  myself  now  trace 
to  their  beginnings  thoughts  which  have  progressively  ac- 
cumulated1— and  though  in  many  cases,  where  the  detec- 
tion was  my  own,  I  may  have  found,  on  examination,  that 
there  were  others  who  had  forestalled  me.  qui  nostra  ante 

i  I  have  availed  myself  in  this  republication,  of  several  suggestions  on  the 
subject  of  the  Patriarchal  Church,  (No.  i.  Part  r.)  offered  to  me  some  years- 
ago  in  a  letter  by  the  Rev.  J.  W.  Burgon  of  Worcester  College,  Oxford ;  and 
of  one  coincidence  (No.  xi.  Part  iv.)  communicated  to  me  in  substance,  by 
letter  also,  by  the  Rev.  J.  Daniel,  of  St.  John's  College,  Cambridge,  soon 
after  the.  first  Edition  of  the  Veracity  of  the  Gospels  came  out. 


VI  PREFACE. 

nos,  yet  most  of  them  I  have  not  seen  noticed  by  com- 
mentators at  all,  and  scarcely  any  of  them  in  that  light  in 
which  only  I  regard  them,  as  grounds  of  Evidence.  It 
is  to  this  application,  therefore,  of  Expositions,  often  in 
themselves  sufficiently  familiar,  that  I  have  to  beg  the  can- 
did attention  of  my  readers  ;  and  if  I  shall  frequently  bring 
out  of  the  treasures  of  God's  word,  or  of  the  interpretation 
of  God's  word,  "  things  old"  the  use  that  I  make  of  them 
may  not  perhaps  be  thought  so. 

As  the  argument  for  the  Veracity  of  the  Gospels  and 
Acts,  derived  from  undesigned  coincidences,  discoverable 
between  them  and  the  Writings  of  Josephus,  does  not  fall 
within  the  general  design  of  this  work,  as  now  constructed, 
and  yet  is  related  to  it,  and  important  in  itself,  I  have 
thought  it  best  not  to  suppress,  but  to  throw  it  into  an  Ap- 
pendix. 

Cambridge, 

May  3,  184V. 


THE   VERACITY 


OF 


THE  BOOKS  OF  MOSES 


PART  I. 

It  is  my  intention  to  argue  in  the  following  pages  the 
Veracity  of  the  Books  of  Scripture,  from  the  instances  they 
contain  of  coincidence  without  design,  in  their  several 
parts.  On  the  nature  of  this  argument  I  shall  not  much 
enlarge,  but  refer  my  readers  for  a  general  view  of  it  to  the 
short  dissertation  prefixed  to  the  Horce  Paulina  of  Dr. 
Paley,  a  work  where  it  is  employed  as  a  test  of  the  veracity 
of  St.  Paul's  Epistles  with  singular  felicity  and  force,  and 
for  which  suitable  incidents  were  certainly  much  more 
abundant  than  those  which  any  other  portion  of  Scripture 
of  the  same  extent  provides  ;  still,  however,  if  the  instances 
which  I  can  offer,  gathered  from  the  remainder  of  Holy 
Writ,  are  so  numerous  and  of  such  a  kind  as  to  preclude 
the  possibility  of  their  being  the  effect  of  accident,  it  is 
enough.  It  does  not  require  many  circumstantial  coinci- 
dences to  determine  the  mind  of  a  jury  as  to  the  credibility 
of  a  witness  in  our  courts,  even  where  the  life  of  a  fellow- 
creature  is  at  stake.  I  say  this,  not  as  a  matter  of  charge, 
but  as  a  matter  of  fact,  indicating  the  authority  which  at- 
taches to  this  species  of  evidence,  and  the  confidence  uni- 


8  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART   I. 

versally  entertained  that  it  cannot  deceive.  Neither  should 
it  be  forgotten,  that  an  argument  thus  popular,  thus  ap- 
plicable to  the  affairs  of  common  life  as  a  test  of  truth, 
derives  no  small  value  when  enlisted  in  the  cause  of 
Revelation,  from  the  readiness  with  which  it  is  appre- 
hended and  admitted  by  mankind  at  large  ;  and  from  the 
simplicity  of  the  nature  of  its  appeal ;  for  it  springs  out  of 
the  documents,  the  truth  of  which  it  is  intended  to  sustain, 
and  terminates  in  them ;  so  that  he  who  has  these,  has 
the  defence  of  them. 

2.  Nor  is  this  all.  The  argument  deduced  from  coinci- 
dence without  design  has  further  claims,  because,  if  well 
made  out,  it  establishes  the  authors  of  the  several  books 
of  Scripture  as  independent  witnesses  to  the  facts  they 
relate ;  and  this,  whether  they  consulted  each  other's 
writings,  or  not;  for  the  coincidences,  if  good  for  any- 
thing, are.  such  as  could  not  result  from  combination, 
mutual  understanding,  or  arrangement.  If  any  which  I 
may  bring  forward  may  seem  to  be  such  as  might  have  so 
arisen,  they  are  only  to  be  reckoned  ill-chosen,  and  dis- 
missed. For  it  is  no  small  merit  of  this  argument,  that  it 
consists  of  parts,  one  or  more  of  which  (if  they  be  thought 
unsound)  may  be  detached  without  any  dissolution  of  the 
reasoning  as  a  whole.  Undesignedness  must  he  apparent 
in  the  coincidences,  or  they  are  not  to  the  purpose.  In 
our  argument  we  defy  people  to  sit  down  together,  or 
transmit  their  writings  one  to  another,  and  produce  the 
like.  Truths  known  independently  to  each  of  them,  must 
be  at  the  bottom  of  documents  having  such  discrepancies 
and  such  agreements  as  these  in  question.  The  point, 
therefore,  whether  the  authors  of  the  books  of  Scripture 
have  or  have  not  copied  from  one  another,  which  in  the 
case  of  some  of  them  has  been  so  much  labored,  is  thus 
rendered  a  matter  of  comparative  indifference.     Let  them 


PART    I.  BOOKS    OF    MOSES.  9 

have  so  done,  still  by  our  argument  their  independence 
would  be  secured,  and  the  nature  of  their  testimony  be 
shown  to  be  such  as  could  only  result  from  their  separate- 
knowledge  of  substantial  facts. 

3.  I  will  add  another  consideration  which  seems  to  me 
to  deserve  serious  attention  :  that  in  several  instances  the 
probable  truth  of  a  miracle  is  involved  in  the  coincidence. 
This  is  a  point  which  we  should  distinguish  from  the 
general  drift  of  the  argument  itself.  The  general  drift  of 
our  argument  is  this,  than  when  we  see  the  writers  of  the 
Scriptures  clearly  telling  the  truth  in  those  cases  where  wo 
have  the  means  of  checking  their  accounts, — when  we 
see  that  they  are  artless,  consistent,  veracious  writers, 
where  we  have  the  opportunity  of  examining  the  fact,  it 
is  reasonable  to  believe  that  they  are  telling  the  truth  in 
those  cases  where  we  have  not  the  means  of  checking 
them, — that  they  are  veracious  where  we  have  not  the 
means  of  putting  them  to  proof.  But  the  argument  I  am 
now  pressing  is  distinct  from  this.  We  are  hereby  called 
upon,  not  merely  to  assent  that  Moses  and  the  author  of 
the  Book  of  Joshua,  for  example;  or  Isaiah  and  the  author 
of  the  Book  of  Kings ;  or  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Luke  : 
speak  the  truth  when  they  record  a  miracle,  because  we 
know  them  to  speak  the  truth  in  many  other  matters, 
(though  this  would  be  only  reasonable  where  there  is  no 
impeachment  of  their  veracity  whatever,)  but  we  are  called 
upon  to  believe  a  particular  miracle,  because  the  very  cir- 
cumstances ichich  attend  it  furnish  the  coincidence.  I 
look  upon  this  as  a  point  of  very  great  importance.  I  do 
not  say  that  the  coincidence  in  such  a  case  establishes 
the  miracle,  but  that  by  establishing  the  truth  of  ordinary 
incidents  which  involve  the  miracle,  which  compass  the 
miracle  round  about,  and  which  cannot  be  separated  from 


10  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    I. 

the  miracle  without  the  utter  laceration  of  the  history 
itself,  it  goes  very  near  to  establish  it. 

4.  On  the  whole,  it  is  surely  a  striking  fact,  and  one 
that  could  scarcely  happen  in  any  continuous  fable,  how- 
ever cunningly  devised,  that  annals  written  by  so  many 
hands,  embracing  so  many  generations  of  men,  relating  to 
so  many  different  states  of  society,  abounding  in  super- 
natural incidents  throughout,  when  brought  to  this  same 
touchstone  of  truth,  undesignedness,  should  still  not  flinch 
from  it ;  and  surely  the  character  of  a  history,  like  the 
character  of  an  individual,  when  attested  by  vouchers  not 
of  one  family,  or  of  one  place,  or  of  one  date  only,  but  by 
such  as  speak  to  it  under  various  relations,  in  different 
situations,  and  at  divers  periods  of  time,  can  scarcely 
deceive  us. 

Perhaps  I  may  add,  that  the  turn  which  biblical  criti- 
cism has  of  late  years  taken,  gives  the  peculiar  argument 
here  employed  the  advantage  of  being  the  word  in  season : 
and  whilst  the  articulation  of  Scripture  (so  to  speak), 
occupied  with  its  component  parts,  may  possibly  cause  it 
to  be  less  regarded  than  it  should  be  in  the  mass  and  as  a 
whole,  the  effect  of  this  argument  is  to  establish  the  gen- 
eral truth  of  Scripture,  and  with  that  to  content  itself;  its 
general  truth.  I  mean,  considered  with  a  reference  to  all 
practical  purposes,  which  is  our  chief  concern  :  and  thus 
to  pluck  the  sting  out  of  those  critical  difficulties,  however 
numerous  and  however  minute,  which  in  themselves  have  a 
tendency  to  excite  our  suspicion  and  trouble  our  peace.  Its 
effect,  I  say,  is  to  establish  the  general  truth  of  Scripture, 
because  by  this  investigation  1  find  occasional  tokens  of  ve- 
racity, such  as  cannot,  I  think,  mislead  us,  breaking  out,  as 
the  volume  is  unrolled,  unconnected,  unconcerted,  unlooked 
for ;  tokens  which  I  hail  as  guarantees  for  more  facts  than 
they  actually  cover  ;  as  spots  which  truth  has  singled  out 


PART  I. 


BOOKS    OF    MOSES.  11 


whereon  to  set  her  seal,  in  testimony  that  the  whole  docu- 
ment, of  which  they  are  a  part,  is  her  own  act  and  deed  ; 
as  pass- words,  with  which  the  Providence  of  God  has  taken 
care  to  furnish  his  ambassadors,  which,  though  often  trifling 
in  themselves,  and  having  no  proportion  (it  may  be)  to  the 
length  or  importance  of  the  tidings  they  accompany,  are 
still  enough  to  prove  the  bearers  to  be  in  the  confidence  of 
their  Almighty  Sovereign,  and  to  be  qualified  to  execute 
the  general  commission  with  which  they  are  charged 
under  his  authority. 

I  shall  produce  the  instances  of  coincidence  without 
design  which  I  have  to  offer,  in  the  order  of  the  Books  of 
Scripture  that  supply  them,  beginning  with  the  Books  of 
Moses.  But  before  I  proceed  to  individual  cases,  I  will 
endeavor  to  develop  a  principle  upon  which  the  Book  of 
Genesis  goes  as  a  whole,  for  this  is  in  itself  an  example 
of  consistency.. 


I. 


There  may  be  those  who  look  upon  the  Book  of 
Genesis  as  an  epitome  of  the  general  history  of  the  world 
in  its  early  ages,  and  of  the  private  history  of  certain 
families  more  distinguished  than  the  rest.  And  so  it  is, 
and  on  a  first  view  it  may  seem  to  be  little  else;  but  if  we 
consider  it  more  closely,  I  think  we  may  convince  ourselves 
of  the  truth  of  this  proposition,  that  it  contains  fragments 
(as  it  were)  of  the  fabric  of  a  Patriarchal  Church,  frag- 
ments scattered  indeed  and  imperfect,  but  capable  of  com- 
bination, and  when  combined,  consistent  as  a  whole. 
Now  it  is  not  easy  to  imagine  that  any  impostor  would 
set  himself  to  compose  a  book  upon  a  plan  so  recondite ; 
nor,  if  he  did,  would  it  be  possible  for  him  to  execute  it  as 


12  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    I. 

it  is  executed  here.  For  the  incidents  which  go  to  prove 
this  proposition  are  to  be  picked  out  from  among  many 
Others,  and  on  being  brought  together  by  ourselves,  they 
are  found  to  agree  together  as  parts  of  a  system,  though 
they  are  not  contemplated  as  such,  or  at  least  are  not  pro- 
duced as  such,  by  the  author  himself. 

I  am  aware  that,  whilst  we  are  endeavoring  to  obtain  a 
view  of  such  a  Patriarchal  Church  by  the  glimpses  af- 
forded us  in  Genesis,  there  is  a  danger  of  our  theology 
becoming  visionary: — it  is  a  search  upon  which  the  imagi- 
nation enters  with  alacrity,  and  readily  breaks  its  bounds 
— it  has  done  so  in.  former  times  and  in  our  own.  Still 
the  principle  of  such  investigation  is  good  ;  for  out  of  God's 
book,  as  out  of  God's  world,  more  may  be  often  concluded 
than  our  philosophy  at  first  suspects.  The  principle  is 
good,  for  it  is  sanctioned  by  our  Lord  himself,  who  re- 
proaches the  Sadducees  with  not  knowing  those  Scriptures 
which  they  received,  because  they  had  not  deduced  the 
doctrine  of  a  future  state  from  the  words  of  Moses,  "  I  am 
the  God  of  Abraham,  and  the  God  of  Isaac,  and  the  God 
of  Jacob,"  though  the  doctrine  was  there  if  they  would  but 
have  sought  it  out.  One  consideration,  however,  we  must 
take  along  with  us  in  this  inquiry,  that  the  Books  of 
Moses  are  in  most  case-  a  very  incomplete  history  of  facts 
— telling  something  and  leaving  a  groat  deal  untold — 
abounding  in  chasms  which  cannot  be  filled  up — not, 
therefore,  to  be  lightly  esteemed  even  in  their  hints,  for 
hints  arc  often  all  that  they  oiler. 

The  proofs  of  this  are  numberless;  but  as  it  is  impor- 
tant to  my  argument  that  the  thing  itself  should  be  dis- 
tinctly borne  in  mind,]  will  name  a  few.  Thus  if  we 
read  the  history  of  Joseph  as  it  is  given  in  the  37th  chapter 
of  Genesis,  where  his  brethren  first  put  him  into  the  pit 
and  then   sell  him   to  the  Ishmaelits.  we  might   conclude 


pART    I#  BOOKS    OF    MOSES.  13 

that  he  was  himself  quite  passive  in  the  whole  transaction. 
Yet  when  the  brothers  happen  to  talk  together  upon  this 
same  subject  many  years  afterwards  in   Egypt,  they  say 
one  to  another,   «  We  are  verily  guilty  concerning   our 
brother,  in  that  we  saw  the  anguish  of  his  soul  when  he 
besought  us,  and  we  would  not  hear."1     All  these  fervent 
entreaties  are  sunk  in  the  direct  history  of  the  event,  and 
only  come  out  by  accident  after  all.     As  another  instance. 
The  simple  account  of  Jacob's  reluctance  to  part  with  Ben- 
jamin, would  lead  us  to  suppose  that  it  was  expressed  and 
overcome  in  a  short  time,  and  with  no  great  effort.     Yet 
we  incidentally  hear  from  Judah  that  this  family  struggle 
(for  such  it  seems  to  have  been)  had  occupied  as  much 
time  as  would  have  sufficed  for  a  journey  to  Egypt  and 
back.2     As  a  third  instance.     The  several  blessings  which 
Jacob  bestows  on  his  sons  have  probably  a  reference  to  the 
past  as  well  as  to  the  future  fortunes  of  each.     In  the  case 
of  Reuben,  the  allusion  happens  to  be  a  circumstance  in 
his  life,  with  which  we   are  already  acquainted;    here, 
therefore,  we  understand  the  old  man's  address3 ;  but  in 
the  case  of  several  at  least  of  his  other  sons,  where  there 
are  probably  similar  allusions  to  events  in  their  lives  too, 
which  have  not,  however,  been  left  on  record,  there  is  much 
'  that  is  obscure— the  brevity  of  the  previous  narrative  not 
supplying  us  with  the  proper  key  to  the  blessing.     As  a 
fourth  instance.     The  address  of  Jacob  on  his  death-bed  to 
Reuben,  to  which  I  have  just  referred,  shows  how  deeply 
Jacob  resented  the  wrong  done  him  by  this  son  many  years 
before,  and  proves  what  a  breach  it  must  have  made  be- 
tween them  at.  the  time  ;  yet  all  that  is  said  of  it  in  the 
Mosaic  history  is,  <;  and  Israel  heard  it,"* -not  a  syllable 
more.     It  is  needless  to  multiply  instances ;  all  that  I  wish 
to  impress  is  tins,  that  in  the  Book  of  Genesis  a  hint  is 
iGen.xlii.21.  *  xliii.  10.      '        ■  xli*.  4.  *  xxxv.  22. 

2 


14  THE    VERACITY    OF   THE  PART    I. 

not  to  be  wasted,  but  improved  ;  and  that  he  who  expects 
every  probable  deduction  from  Scripture  to  be  made  out 
complete  in  all  its  parts  before  he  will  admit  it,  expects 
more  than  he  will  in  many  cases  meet  with,  and  will  learn 
much  less  than  he  might  otherwise  learn. 

Having  made  these  preliminary  remarks,  I  shall  now 
proceed  to  collect  the  detached  incidents  in  Genesis  which 
appear  to  point  out  the  existence  of  a  Patriarchal  Church. 
And  the  circumstance  of  so  many  incidents  tending  to  this 
one  centre,  though  evidently  without  being  marshalled  or 
arranged,  implies  veracity  in  the  record  itself;  for  it  is  a 
very  comprehensive  instance  of  coincidence  without  design 
in  the  several  parts  of  that  record. 

1.  First,  then,  the  Patriarchs  seem  to  have  had  places 
set  apart  for  the  worship  of  God,  consecrated,  as  it  were, 
especially  to  His  service.  To  do  things  "  before  the  Lord," 
is  a  phrase  not  unfrequently  occurring,  and  generally  in  a 
local  sense.  Cain  and  Abel  appear  to  have  brought  their 
offerings  to  the  same  spot — it  might  be,  (as  some  have 
thought,)1  to  the  East  of  the  Garden,  where  the  symbols 
of  God's  presence  were  displayed  ;  and  when  Cain  is  ban- 
ished from  his  first  dwelling,  and  driven  to  wander  upon 
the  earth,  he  is  said  to  have  "gone  out  from  the  presence 
of  the  Lord  ;"aas  though,  in  the  land  where  he  was  hence- 
forward to  live,  he  would  no  longer  have  access  to  the  spot 
where  God  had  more  especially  set  his  name  :  or  it  might 
be  a  sacred  tent,  for  it  is  told  Cain,  "  if  thou  doest  not  well, 
sin,  (i.  e.  a  sin-offering)  licth  at  the  door  :"3  and  we  know 
that  the  sacrifices  were  constantly  brought  to  the  door  of 
the  Tabernacle,  in  later  times.4  Again,  when  the  angels 
had  left  Abraham,  and  were  gone  towards  Sodom,  "  Abra- 

1  Hooker,  Eccl.  Pol.  b.  v.  §  11.  Vide  Mr.  Faber's  Three  Dispensations, 
Vol.  I.  p.  8;  and  comp.  Wisdom,  ix.  9. 

2  Gen.  iv.  1G.  3  ib.  iv.  7.  *  See  Lightfoot,  i.  3. 


PART    I.  BOOKS    OF    MOSES.  15 

ham,"  we  read,  "  stood  yet  before  the  Lord,"1  i.  e.  he  staid 
to  plead  with  God  for  Sodom  in  the  place  best  suited  to 
sucli  a  service,  the  place  where  prayer  was  wont  to  be 
made ;  and  accordingly  it  follows  immediately  after,  "  and 
Abraham  drew  near  and  said  ;"2  and  again,  the  next  day, 
"  Abraham  gat  up  early  in  the  morning,"  (probably  his 
usual  hour  of  prayer,)  "  to  the  place  where  he  stood  before 
the  Lord"3  the  same  where  he  had  put  up  his  intercessions 
to  God  the  day  before  ;  in  short,  the  place  where  he  "  built 
an  altar  unto  the  Lord,"  when  he  first  came  to  dwell  in 
the  plain  of  Mamre,4  for  that  was  still  the  scene  of  this 
transaction.  Again,  of  Rebekah  we  read,  that  when  the 
children  struggled  within  her,  "  she  went  to  inquire  of  the 
Lord,"  and  an  answer  was  received  prophetic  of  the  different 
fortunes  of  those  children.5  And  when  Isaac  contempla- 
ted blessing  his  son,  which  was  a  religious  act,  a  solemn 
appeal  to  God  to  remember  His  covenant  unto  Abraham, 
it  was  to  be  done  "  before  the  Lord."5  The  place  might 
be  as  I  have  just  said,  an  altar  such  as  was  put  up  by 
Abraham  at  Hebron,  by  Isaac  at  Beer-sheba,  or  by  Jacob 
at  Beth-el,  where  they  respectively  dwelt  ;7  it  might  be,  as 
I  have  also  suggested,  a  separate  tent,  and  a  tent  actually 
was  set  apart  by  Moses  outside  the  camp,  before  the  Tab- 
ernacle was  erected,  where  every  one  repaired  who  sought 
the  Lord  ;8  or  it  might  be  a  separate  part  of  a  chamber 
of  the  tent ;  but  however  that  was,  the  expression  is  a  defi- 
nite one,  and  relates  to  some  appointed  quarter  to  which 
the  family  resorted  for  purposes  of  devotion.  Accord- 
ingly the  very  same  expression  is  used  in  after-times,  when 
the  Tabernacle  had  been  set  up,  confessedly  as  the  place 
where  the  people  were  to  assemble  for  prayer  and  sacrifice. 

i  Gen.  xviii.  22.  2  ib.  xviii.  23.  3  lb.  xix.  27. 

<  Ib.  xiii.  18.  5  ib.  xxv.  22.  «   Ib.  xxvii.  1. 

7  See  Gen.  xiii.  18;  xxvi.  25;  xxxv.  C.  s  Exod.  xxxiii.  7. 


16  THE    VERACITY    01-    THE  PART    I. 

"  He  shall  offer  it  of  his  own  voluntary  will  at  the  door  of 
the  Tabernacle  of  the  congregation  before  the  Lord,  and 
he  shall  kill  the  bullock  before  the  Lord."1  "  Three  times 
in  the  year  shall  all  thy  males  appear  before  the  Lord  thy 
God  in  the  place  which  he  shall  choose."2  Here  there  can 
be  no  question  as  to  the  meaning  of  the  phrase  ;  it  occurs, 
indeed,  some  five-and-thirty  times  in  the  last  four  books  of 
Moses,  and  in  all  as  significant  of  the  place  set  apart  for 
tfie  worship  of  God.  I  conclude  therefore  that  in  those  pas- 
sages of  Genesis  which  I  have  quoted,  Moses  employs  the 
same  expression  in  the  same  sense. 

Such  are  some  of  the  hints  which  seem  to  point  to 
places  of  patriarchal  woj'shij). 

2.  In  like  manner,  and  by  evidences  of  the  same  indirect 
and  imperfect  kind,  I  gather  that  there  were  j)ersons 
whose  business  it  was  to  perform  the  rites  of  that  worship 
— not  perhaps  their  sole  business,  but  their  appropriate 
business.  Whether  the  first-born  was  by  right  of  birth 
the  priest  also  has  been  doubted  ;  at  the  same  time  it  is 
obvious  that  this  circumstance  would  often,  perhaps  gener- 
ally where  there  was  no  impediment,  point  him  out  as  the 
fit  person  to  keep  alive  in  his  own  household  the  fear  of 
that  God  who  alone  could  make  it  to  prosper.  Persons, 
however,  invested  with  the  sacerdotal  office  there  undoubt- 
edly were  ;  sucli  was  Melchizedeck  "  the  Priest  of  the 
Most  High  God,"  as  he  is  expressly  called,3  and  the  func- 
tions of  his  ministry  he  publicly  performs  towards  Abraham, 
blessing  him  as  God's  servant,  as  the  instrument  by  which 
I  lis  .inn  had  overthrown  the  confederate  kings,  and  rc- 
ceivirijn;  from  Abraham  a  tenth  of  the  spoil,  which  could  be 
nothing  but  a  religious  offering,  and  which  indeed,  as  such, 
is  the  ground  of  St.  Paul's  argument  for  the  superiority  of 

•  Lev.  i.  3.  a  Deut.  xvl.  16.  3  Gen.  xiv.  18. 


PART    I.  BOOKS   OF    MOSES.  17 

Christ's  priesthood  over  the  Levitical.1  Such  probably  was 
Jethro  "  the  Priest  of  Midian."2  Moreover,  we  find  the 
priests  expressly  mentioned  as  a  body  of  functionaries  ex- 
isting amongst  the  Israelites  even  before  the  consecration  of 
Aaron  and  his  sons  ;3  the  "young  men"  who  offered  burnt- 
offerings,  spoken  of  Exod.  xxiv.  5,  being  the  same  under  a 
different  name,  probably  the  first-born.  Then  if  we  read 
of  Patriarchal  Priests,  so  do  we  of  Patriarchal  "  Preachers 
of  Righteousness,"  as  in  Noah.4  So  do  we  of  Patriarchal 
Prophets,  as  in  Abraham,5  as  in  Balaam,  as  in  Job,  as  in 
Enoch.  All  these  are  hints  of  a  Patriarchal  Church,  dif- 
fering perhaps  less  in  its  construction  and  in  the  manner 
in  which  God  was  pleased  to  use  it,  as  the  means  of  keeping 
himself  in  remembrance  amongst  men,  from  the  churches 
which  have  succeeded,  than  may  be  at  first  imagined. 

3.  Pursue  we  the  inquiry,  and  I  think  a  hint  may  be 
discovered  of  a  peculiar  dress  assigned  to  the  Patriarchal 
Priest  when  he  officiated ;  for  Jacob,  being  already  pos- 
sessed of  the  birthright,  and  probably  in  this  instance  of 
the  priesthood  with  it,  since  Esau  by  surrendering  the 
birthright  became  "profane"*  goes  in  to  Isaac  to  receive 
the  blessing,  a  religious  act,  as  I  have  already  said,  to  be 
done  before  the  Lord.  Now  on  this  occasion,  Rebekah 
took  "  goodly  raiment"  (such  is  our  translation)  "  of  her 
eldest  son  Esau,  which  were  with  her  in  the  house,  and 
put  them  upon  Jacob  her  youngest  son."7  Were  these  the 
sacerdotal  robes  of  the  first-born?  It  occurred  to  me 
that  they  might  be  so ;  and  on  reference  I  find  that  the 
Jews  themselves  so  interpreted  them,3  an  interpretation 
which  has  been  treated  by  Dr.  Patrick  more  contemptu- 

1  Heb.  vii.  9.  2  Exod.  ii.  16.  3  Exod.  xix.  22. 

*  2  Peter  ii.  5.  s  Gen.  xx.  7.  6  Heb.  xii.  16. 

7  Gen.  xxvii.  15.  s  vide  Patrick  in  loc. 

2* 


18  THE    TERACITY    OF    THE  PART    1. 

ously  than  it  deserved  to  be  j1  for  I  look  upon  it  as  a  trifle 
indeed,  but  still  as  a  trifle  which  is  a  component  part  of 
the  system  I  am  endeavoring  to  trace  out ;  had  it  6tood 
alone  it  would  have  been  fruitless  perhaps  to  have  haz- 
arded a  word  upon  it — as  it  stands  in  conjunction  with  so 
many  other  indications  of  a  Patriarchal  Church  it  has  its 
weight.  Now  I  do  not  say  that  the  Hebrew  expression2 
here  rendered  "  raiment"  (for  of  the  epithet  "  goodly"  I  will 
speak  by  and  by,)  is  exclusively  confined  to  the  garments 
of  a  priest ;  it  is  certainly  a  term  of  considerable  latitude, 
and  is  by  no.  means  to  be  so  restricted ;  still  when  the 
priest's  garments  are  to  be  expressed  by  any  general  term 
at  all,  it  is  always  by  the  one  in  question.  Yet  there  is 
another  term  in  the  Hebrew,3  perhaps  of  as  frequent  oc- 
currence, and  also  a  comprehensive  term ;  but  whilst  this 
latter  is  constantly  applied  to  the  dress  of  other  individuals 
of  both- sexes,  I  do  not  find  it  ever  applied  to  the  dress  of 
the  priests.  The  distinction  and  the  argument  will  be  best 
illustrated  by  examples : — Thus  we  read  in  Leviticus,4  ac- 
cording to  our  version,  "  the  high-priest  that  is  consecrated 
to  put  on  the  garments,  shall  not  uncover  his  head,  nor 
rend  his  clothes."  The  word  here  translated  "  garments" 
in  the  one  clause,  and  "clothes"  in  the  other,  is  in  the 
Hebrew  in  both  clauses  the  same — is  the  word  in  question 
— is  the  raiment  of  Esau  which  Rebekah  took,  and  in 
both  clauses  the  priests'  dress  is  meant,  and  no  other.  So 
again,  what  are  called6  "  the  clothes  of  service,"  is  still  the 

i  More  especially  as  he  quotes  in  another  place  (on  Exod.  xxviii.  2.)  an 
opinion  of  the  Hebrew  Doctors,  that  vestments  were  inseparable  from  the. 
priesthood,  so  that  Adam,  Abel,  and  Cain  did  not  sacrifice  without  them ;  see 
Gen.  iii.  'JO  :  and  again,  (on  Exod  xxviii.  35,)  a  maxim  among  the  Jews, 
that  when  the  priests  were  clothed  with  their  garments  they  were  priests; 
when  they  were  not  so  clothed,  they  were  not  priests. 

2  0*153  3  i-l-sbb  iT&Ofa  *  CnaP-  "i-  10- 

■i  :  i  :  t   i 

5   Exod.  XXXV.  19. 


PART    I. 


BOOKS    OF    MOSES.  19 


same  word,  as  implying  Aaron's  clothes,  or  those  of  his 
sons,  and  no  other.  And  again,  Moses  says,1  "  uncover 
not  your  heads,  neither  rend  your  clothes,  lest  ye  die ;" 
still  the  word  is  the  same,  for  he  is  there  speaking  to 
Aaron  and  his  sons,  and  to  none  other.  But  when  he 
Bays,*  "  your  clothes  are  not  waxed  old.5'  the  Hebrew  word 
is  no  longer  the  same,  though  the  English  word  is,  but  is 
the  other  word  of  which  I  spoke  ;3  for  the  clothes  of  the 
people  are  here  signified;  and  not  of  the  priest >. 

This,  therefore,  is  all  that  can  be  maintained,  that  the 
term  used  to  express  the  "  raiment"  which  Rebekah 
brought  out  for  Jacob,  is  the  term  which  should  express 
appropriately  the  dress  of  the  priest,  though  it  certainly 
would  not  express  it  exclusively.  But  again,  the  epithet 
"goodly"  (or  "desirable"4  as  the  margin  renders  it  more 
closely.)  annexed  to  the  raiment  is  still  in  favor  of  our  in- 
terpretation, though  neither  is  this  word,  any  more  than 
the  other,  conclusive  of  the  question.  Certainly,  however, 
it  is,  that  though  the  word  translated  "goodly"  is  not  re- 
stricted to  sacred  things,  it  does  so  happen  that  to  sacred 
things  it  is  attached  in  very  many  instances,  if  not  in  a 
majority  of  instances  where  it  occurs  in  Holy  Writ  Thus 
the  utensils  of  the  Temple  which  Nebuchadnezzar  carried 
away  are  called  in  the  Book  of  Chronicles5  the  goodly 
vessels  of  the  House  of  the  Lord."  And  Isaiah  writes, 
"  all  our  pleasant  things  are  laid  waste,"5  meaning  the 
Temple — the  word  here  rendered  {:  pleasant."  being  the 
same  as  that  in  the  former  passages  rendered  "  goodly  ;"' 
and  in  the  Lamentations7  we  read.  ?  the  adversary  hath 
spread  out  his  hand  upon  all  our  pleasant  things."  where 
the  Temple  is  again  understood,   as  the  context  proves; 

1  Lev.  x.  6.  2  Deut.  xxix.  5.  3    nrViJ 

4    TTcnn  *  2  Chron.  xxxvi.  10.        6  Isa.  lxiv.  11. 

7  Lam.  i.  10. 


20  THE    VERACITY   OF    THE  PART    I. 

and  in  Genesis,1  "  a  tree  to  be  desired  to  make  one  wise," 
the  term  perhaps  meant  to  convey  a  hint  of  violated 
sanctity  as  entering  into  the  offence  of  our  first  parents. 
In  other  places  it  occurs  in  a  bad  sense,  as  relating  to  what 
was  held  sacred  by  heathens  only,  but  still  what  was  held 
sacred — "  The  oaks  which  ye  have  desired"2  "  all  pleasant 
pictures,"3  objects  of  idolatry,  as  the  tenor  of  the  passage 
indicates — "  their  delectable  things  shall  not  profit,"4  that 
is,  their  idols.  I  may  add  too,  that  the  aToX-q  of  the  Sep- 
tuagint,  (for  this  answers  to  the  "  raiment"  of  our  version,) 
though  not  limited  to  the  robe  of  the  altar,  is  the  term 
used  in  the  Greek  as  the  appropriate  one  for  the  robe 
of  Aaron  ;  and  finally,  that  the  care  with  which  this  ves- 
ture had  been  kept  by  Rebekah,  and  the  perfumes  with 
which  it  was  imbued  when  Jacob  wore  it,  (for  -Isaac 
"  smelled  the  smell  of  his  raiment,")  savor  of  things  per- 
taining unto  God. 

Again,  it  seems  to  be  by  no  means  improbable  that 
<;  the  coat  of  many  colors?  (xil&va  noixdov,  as  the  LXX. 
understands  it5)  which  Jacob  made  for  Joseph,  was  a 
sacerdotal  garment.  It  figures  very  largely  in  a  very 
short  history.  It  appears  to  have  been  viewed  with  great 
jealousy  by  his  brothers ;  far  greater  than  an  ordinary 
dress,  which  merely  bespoke  a  certain  partiality  on  the 
part  of  a  parent,  would  have  been  likely  to  inspire.  They 
strip  him  of  it,  when  they  put  him  in  the  pit;  they  dip  it 
in  the  blood  of  the  goat,  when  they  want  to  persuade 
Jacob  that  a  wild  beast  had  devoured  him.  Reuben,  Jacob's 
first-born,  and  naturally  therefore  the  Priest  of  the  family, 
had  forfeited  his  father's  affection  and  disgraced  his  station 
by  his  conduct  towards  ftilhah.     Jacob  might  feel  that 

'   Gen.  Hi.  G  2  Isa.  i.  29.  3  Ibid.  ii.  16. 

<  Ibid.  xliv.  9.  5  Gen.  xxivii  3. 


PART    I.  BOOKS    OF    MOSES.  21 

the  priesthood  was  open  under  the  circumstances;  and  his 
fondness  for  Joseph  might  suggest  to  him,  that  he  might 
in  justice  be  considered  his  first-born:  for  that  he  sup- 
posed Rachel,  Joseph's  mother,  to  be  his  wife,  when  Leah, 
Reuben's  mother,  had  been  deceitfully  substituted  for  her. 
He  might  give  him  therefore,  (:  this  coat  of  many  colors," 
as  a  token  of  his  future  office.  Hannah  brought  Samuel 
"  a  little  coat "  from  year  to  year,  when  she  came  up  with 
her  husband  to  offer  his  yearly  sacrifice:1  and,  though 
Aaron's  coat  is  not  called  a  coat  of  many  colors,  it  was  so 
in  fact :  "  and  of  the  blue  and  purple  and  scarlet  they 
made  cloths  of  service,  to  do  service  in  the  holy  place,  and 
made  the  holy  garments  for  Aaron."2  On  the  whole, 
therefore,  I  think  there  was  a  meaning  in  this  "coat  of 
many  colors,"  beyond  the  obvious  one  ;  and  that  it  was 
emblematical  of  priestly  functions  which  Jacob  was  anxious 
to  devolve  upon  Joseph. 

4.  Furthermore,  the  Patriarchal  Church  seems  not  to 
have  been  without  its  forms.  Thus  Jacob  consecrates 
the  foundation  of  a  place  of  worship  with  oil  ;3  the  incident 
here  alluded  to  being  apparently  a  much  more  detailed 
and  emphatic  one  than  it  seems  at  first  sight:  for  we  find 
him,  by  anticipation,  calling  "  this  the  house  of  God,  and 
this  the  gate  of  heaven,''4  and  promising  eventually  to 
endow  it  with  tithes  :6  and  we  hear  God  reminding  him  of 
this  solemn  act  long,  afterwards,  when  he  was  in  Syria, 
and  appropriating  to  himself  the  very  title  of  this  Temple  : 
"  I  am  the  God  of  Bethel,  where  thou  anointcdst  the  pillar, 
and  where  thou  vowedst  a  vow  unto  me."6  And  accord- 
ingly we  are  told  at  much  length,  and  with  several  of  the 
circumstances  of  the  case  described,  that  Jacob,  after  his 

i  1  Sam.  ii.  19.  2  Exod.  xxxix.  1.  3  Gen.  xxviii.  18. 

*  lb.  xxviii.  17.  5  lb.  xxviii.  22.  «  Ibid.  xxxi.  13. 


22  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    I. 

return  from  Haran,  actually  fulfilled  his  pious  intentions, 
and  "built  an  altar,"  and  "set  up  a  pillar,"  and  "  poured  a 
drink-offering  thereon."1 

Then  there  appears  to  have  been  the  rite  of  imposition 
of  hands  existing-  in  the  Patriarchal  Church  :  and  when 
Jacob  blessed  Joseph's  children  he  is  very  careful  about 
the  due  observance  of  it ;  the  narrative,  succinct  as  on  the 
whole  it  is,  dwelling  upon  thk  point  with  much  amplifi- 
cation.2 

Again,  the  shoes  of  those  who  trod  upon  holy  ground, 
or  who  entered  consecrated  places  were  to  be  put  off  their 
feet :  the  injunction  to  this  effect,  of  which  we  read  in  the 
case  of  Moses  at  the  bush,  implies  a  usage  already  estab- 
lished ;3  and  this  usage,  though  nowhere  expressly  com- 
manded in  the  Levitical  Law,  appears  to  have  continued 
amongst  the  Israelites  by  tradition  from  the  Patriarchal 
times ;  and  is  that  which  a  passage  in  Ecclesiastes4  probably 
contemplates  in  its  primary  sense,  "  Look  to  thy  foot  when 
thou  comest  to  the  House  of  God."5  And  finally  the 
Patriarchal  Church  had  its  posture  of  worship,  and  men 
bowed  themselves  to  the  ground  when  they  addressed 
God.' 

But  if  there  were  Patriarchal  Places  for  worship — if 
there  were  Priests  to  conduct  the  worship — if  there  were 
decent  Robes  wherein  those  priests  ministered  at  the  wor- 
ship— if  there  were  Forms  connected  with  that  worship ; 
so  do  I  think  there  were  stated  Seasons  set  apart  for  it : 
though  here  again  we  have  nothing  but  hints  to  guide  us 
to  a  conclusion. 

5.  I  confess  that  the  Divine  institution  of  the  Sabbath 

i  Gen.  xxxv.  1.  15.  2  ibid,  xlviii.  13—19.  3  Exod.  iii.  5. 

*  Eccles.  v.  ] .  5  See  Mede's  Works,  b.  ii.  p.  340  et  seq. 

6  Gen.  xxiv.  2G— 52;  Exod.  iv.  31 ;  xii.  27. 


PART    I.  BOOKS    OF   MOSES.  23 

as  a  day  of  religious  duties,  seems  to  me  to  have  been 
from  the  beginning  ;  and  though  we  have  but  glimpses 
of  such  a  fact,  still  to  my  eye  they  present  themselves  as 
parts  of  that  one  harmonious  whole  which  I  am  now 
endeavoring  to  develop  and  draw  out — even  of  a  Patriar- 
chal Church,  whereof  we  see  scarcely  anything  but  by 
glimpse. 

"And  it  came  to  pass  that  on  the  sixth  day  they 
gathered  twice  as  much  bread,  two  omers  for  one  man, 
and  all  the  rulers  of  the  congregation  came,  and  told 
Moses.  And  he  said  unto  them,  This  is  that  which  the 
Lord  hath  said,  To-morrow  is  the  rest  of  the  Holy  Sab- 
bath unto  the  Lord.  Six  days  ye  shall  gather  it ;  but  on 
the  seventh  day,  which  is  the  Sabbath,  in  it  there  shall  be 
none."1  And  again,  in  a  few  verses  after,  "And  the  Lord 
said  unto  Moses,  How  long  refuse  ye  to  keep  my  com- 
mandments and  my  laws  ?  See,  for  that  the  Lord  hath 
given  you  the  Sabbath,  therefore  he  giveth  you  on  the 
sixth  day  the  bread  of  two  days.."  Now  the  transaction 
here  recorded  is  by  some  argued  to  be  the  first  institution 
of  the  Sabbath.  The  inference  I  draw  from  it,  I  confess, 
is  different.  I  see  in  it,  that  a  Sabbath  had  already  been 
appointed — that  the  Lord  had  already  given  it ;  and  that, 
in  accommodation  to  that  institution  already  understood, 
he  had  doubled  the  manna  on  the  sixth  day.  But  even 
supposing  the  Institution  of  the  Sabbath  to  be  here  formally 
proclaimed,  or  supposing  (as  others  would  have  it,  and  as 
the  Jews  themselves  pretend,)  that  it  was  not  now  promul- 
gated, strictly  speaking,  but  was  actually  one  of  the  two 
precepts  given  a  little  earlier  at  Marah,2  still  it  is  not  un- 
common in  the  writings  of  Moses,  nor  indeed  in  other 
'parts  of  Scripture,  for  an  event  to  be  mentioned  as  then 

1  Exod.  xvi.  22.  2  Exod.  xv.  25,  and  compare  Deut.  v.  12. 


24  THE    VERACITY    OP   THE  PART    I. 

occurring  for  the  first  time,  which  had  in  fact  occurred, 
and  which  had  been  reported  to  have  occurred,  long  before. 
For  instance,  Isaac  and  Abimelech  meet,  and  swear  to  do 
each  other  no  injury.  '-And  it  came  to  pass  the  same 
day,  that  Isaac's  servants  came  and  told  him  concerning 
the  well  which  they  had  digged,  and  said  unto  him,  We 
have  found  water :  and  he  called  it  Shebah  ;  therefore  the 
name  of  the  city  is  Beer-Sheba  unto  this  day."1  Now 
who  would  not  say  that  the  name  was  then  given  to  the 
place  by  Isaac,  and  for  the  first  time  ?  Yet  it  had  been 
undoubtedly  given  by  Abraham  long  before,  in  commemo- 
ration of  a  similar  covenant  which  he  had  struck  with 
the  Abimelech  of  his  day.  "These  seven  ewe-lambs," 
said  he  to  that  Prince,  "shalt  thou  take  at  my  hand,  that 
they  may  be  a  witness  unto  thee  that  I  have  digged  this 
well ;  wherefore  he  called  the  place  Beer-Sheba,  beause 
they  sware  both  of  them."2  Again,  "  So  Jacob  came  to 
Luz.  which  is  in  the  land  of  Canaan,  that  is,  Beth-el,  he 
and  all  his  people  that  were  with  him.  And  he  built  there 
an  altar,  and  called  the  place  El-Beth-el,  because  there 
God  appeared  unto  him  when  he  fled  from  the  face  of  his 
brother."3  Who  would  not  conclude  that  the  new  name 
was  given  to  Luz  now  for  the  first  time  ?  Yet  Jacob  had 
in  fact  changed  the  name  a  great  many  years  before, 
when  he  was-  on  his  journey  to  Haran.  "  And  Jacob  rose 
up  early  in  the  morning,  and  took  the  stone  that  he  had 
put  for  his  pillows,  and  set  it  up  for  a  pillar,  and  poured 
oil  upon  the  top  of  it.  And  he  called  the  name  of  that 
place  Beth-el :  but  the  name  of  the  city  was  called  Luz  at 
the  first."4  Or,  as  another  instance  : — "  And  God  appeared 
unto  Jacob  again  when  he  came  out  of  Padan-Aram,  and 

i  Gen.  xxvi.  32.  »  Gen.  xxi.  31. 

3  lb.  xxxv.  6,  7.  *  lb.  xxviii.  18,  19. 


PART    I.  BOOKS    OF    MOSES.  25 

blessed  him  :  and  God  said  unto  him,  Thy  name  is  Jacob, 
thy  name  shall  not  be  called  any  more  Jacob,  but  Israel 
shall  be  thy  name,  and  he  called  his  name  Israel."1  Who 
would  not  suppose  that  the  name  of  Israel  was  now  given 
to  Jacob  for  the  first  time  ?  Yet  several  chapters  before 
this,  when  Jacob  had  wrestled  with  the  angel,  (not  at 
Beth-el,  which  was  the  former  scene,  but  at  Peniel,)  we 
read,  that  "  the  angel  said,  What  is  thy  name  ?  and  he 
said  Jacob :  and  he  said,  Thy  name  shall  be  called  no 
more  Jacob,  but  Israel ;  for  as  a  prince  hast  thou  power 
with  God,  and  with  man,  and  hast  prevailed."2 

Thus  again,  to  add  one  example  more,  we  are  told  in 
the  Book  of  Judges,3  that  a  certain  Jair,  a  Gileadite,  a 
successor  of  Abimelech  in  the  government  of  Israel,  "  had 
thirty  sons  that  rode  on  thirty  ass-colts,  and  they  had  thirty 
cilies,  which  are  called  Havoth-Jair  unto  this  day,  which 
are  in  the  land  of  Gilead."  Who  would  not  conclude  that 
the  cilies  were  then  called  by  this  name  for  the  first  time, 
and  that  this  Jair  was  the  person  from  whom  they  de- 
rived it?  Yet  we  read  in  the  Book  of  Numbers.4  that 
another  Jair.  who  lived  nearly  three  hundred  years  earlier, 
"  went  and  took  the  small  towns  of  Gilead"'  (apparently 
these  very  same,)  "  and  called  them  Havoth-Jair.''  So  that 
the  name  had  been  given  nearly  three  centuries  already. 
Why,  then,  should  it  be  thought  strange  that  the  institu- 
tion of  the  Sabbath  should  be  mentioned  as  if  for  the  first 
time  in  the  16th  chapter  of  Exodus,  and  yet  that  it  should 
have  been  in  fact  founded  at  the  creation  of  the  world,  as 
the  language  of  the  2nd  chapter  of  Genesis,5  taken  in  its 
obvious  meaning,  implies ;  and  as  St.  Paul's  argument  in 
the  4th  chapter  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  (I  think)  re- 


i  Gen.  xxxv.  10.  2  lb.  xxxii.  28.  3  Judges  x.  4. 

4  Num.  xxxii.  41.  5  Gen.  ii.  3. 


26  THE    VERACITY   OF    THE  PART    I. 

quires  it  to  have  been  ? — Nor  is  such  a  case  without  a 
parallel.  "  Moses  gave  unto  you  circumcision,"  says  our 
Lord  ;  yet  there  is  added,  "  not  because  it  is  of  Moses,  but 
of  the  FatJiers  ;"' — and  the  like  may  be  said  of  the  Sab- 
bath ;  that  Moses  gave  it,  and  yet  that  it  was  of  the 
Fatliers.  And  surely  such  observance  of  the  Sabbath 
from  the  beginning  is  in  accordance  with  many  hints 
which  are  conveyed  to  us  of  some  distinction  or  other  be- 
longing to  that  day  from  the  beginning — as  when  Noah 
sends  forth  the  dove  three  times  successively  at  intervals  of 
seven  days :  as  when  Laban  invites  Jacob  to  "  fulfil  his 
week"  after  the  marriage  of  Leah ;  the  nuptial  festivities 
being  probably  terminated  by  the  arrival  of  the  Sabbath  :2 
as  when  Joseph  makes  a  mourning  for  his  father  of  seven 
days  ;3  the  lamentation  most  likely  ceasing  with  the  return 
of  that  festival :  these  and  other  hints  of  the  same  kind 
being,  as  appears  to  me,  pregnant  with  meaning,  and  in- 
tended to  be  so,  in  a  history  of  the  rapid  and  desultory 
nature  of  that  of  Moses.  Neither  is  there  much  difficulty 
in  the  passage  of  Ezekiel,4  with  which  those,  who  main- 
tain the  Sabbath  to  have  been  for  the  first  time  enjoined 
in  the  wilderness,  support  themselves.  "  Wherefore,"  says 
that  Prophet,  "  I  caused  them  to  go  forth  out  of  the  land 
of  Egypt,  and  brought  them  into  the  wilderness — and  I 
gave  them  my  statutes,  and  showed  them  my  judgments. 
which  if  a  man  do,  he  shall  even  live  in  them — moreover 
also  I  gave  them  my  Sabbaths."  Here,  then,  it  is  alleged, 
Ezekiel  affirms,  or  seems  to  affirm,  that  the  Almighty  gave 
the  Israelites  his  Sabbaths  when  he  was  leading  them  out 
of  Egypt,  and  that  He  had  not  given  them  till  then.  Yet 
His  statutes  and  judgments  are  also  spoken  of  as  given 

i  John  vii.  22.  2  Gen.  xxix.  27. 

3  lb.  1.  10.  4  Ezek.  xx.  10,  11,  12. 


PART    I.  BOOKS    OF    MOSES.  27 

at  the  same  time,  whereas  very  many  of  those  had  surely 
been  given  long  before.  It  would  be  very  untrue  to  assert 
that,  until  the  Israelites  were  led  forth  from  Egypt,  no 
statutes  or  judgments  of  the  same  kind  had  been  ever 
given  :  it  was  in  the  wilderness  that  the  law  respecting 
clean  and  unclean  beasts  was  promulgated,  yet  that  law 
had  certainly  been  published  long  before  ;'  and  the  same 
may  be  said  of  many  others,  which  I  will  not  enumerate 
here,  because  I  shall  have  occasion  to  do  it  by  and  by. 
My  argument,  then,  is  briefly  this  : — that  as  Ezekiel  speaks 
of  statutes  and  judgments  given  to  the  Israelites  in  the 
wilderness,  some  of  which  were  certainly  old  statutes  and 
judgments  repeated  and  enforced,  so  when  he  says  that 
the  Sabbaths  were  given  to  the  Israelites  in  the  wilderness, 
he  cannot  be  fairly  accounted  to  assert  that  the  Sabbaths 
had  never  been  given  till  then.  The  fact  indeed  probably 
was.  that  they  had  been  neglected  and  half  forgotten  dur- 
ing the  long  bondage  in  Egypt,  (slavery  being  unfavorable 
to  morals,)  and  that  the  observance  of  them  was  re-as- 
serted and  renewed  at  the  time  of  the  promulgation  of  the 
Law  in  the  Desert.  In  this  sense,  therefore,  the  Prophet 
might  well  declare,  that  on  that  occasion  God  gave  the 
Israelites  his  Sabbaths.  It  is  true,  that  in  addition  to  the 
motive  for  the  observance  of  the  Sabbath,  (hinted  in  the 
2nd  chapter  of  Genesis,  and  more  fully  expressed  in  the 
20th  of  Exodus,)  which  is  of  universal  obligation,  other 
motives  were  urged  upon  the  Israelites  specially  applicable 
to  them— as  that  "  the  day  should  be  a  sign  between 
God  and  them"2 — as  that  it  should  be  a  remembrance  of 
their  having  been  made  to  rest  from  the  yoke  of  the  Egyp- 
tians.3 Yet  such  supplementary  sanctions  to  the  per- 
formance of  a  duty  (however  well  adapted  to  secure  the 

i  Gen.  vii.  2.  -  Exod.  xxxi  17.  3  Deut.  v.  15. 


28  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    I. 

obedience  of  the  Israelites)  are  quite  consistent  with  a  pre- 
vious  command  addressed  to  all,  and  upon  a  principle 
binding  on  all.1 

I  have  now  attempted  to  show,  but  very  briefly,  lest 
otherwise  the  scope  of  my  argument  should  be  lost  sight  of, 
that  there  were  among  the  Patriarchs  places  set  apart  for 
worship — persons  to  .officiate — a  decent  ceremonial — an 
appointed  season  for  holy  things — I  will  now  suggest  in 
very  few  words,  (still  gathering  my  information  from  such 
hints  as  the  Book  of  Genesis  supplies  from  time  to  time,) 
something  of  the  duties  and  doctrines  which  were  taught 
in  that  ancient  Church  :  and  here,  I  think  it  will  appear, 
that  the  Law  and  the  Prophets  of  the  next  Dispensation 
had  their  prototypes  in  that  of  the  Patriarchs — that  the 
Second  Temple  was  greater  indeed  in  glory  than  the  First, 
but  was  nevertheless  built  up  out  of  the  First,  J,he  one 
body  "  not  unclothed,"  but  the  other  rather  "  clothed  upon." 

6.  In  this  primitive  Church,  then,  the  distinction  of 
clean  and  unclean  is  already  known,  and  known  as  much 
in  detail  as  under  the  Levitical  Law,  every  animal  being 
arranged  by  Noah  in  one  class  or  the  other;2  and  the  clean 
being  exclusively  used  by  him  for  sacrifice.3  The  blood, 
which  is  the  life  of  the  animal,  is  already  withheld  as  food.4 
Murder  is  already  denounced  as  demanding  death  for  its 
punishment.3  Adultery  is  already  forbidden,  as  we  learn 
from  the  cases  of  Pharaoh  and  Abimelech,6  of  Reuben,7 
and  Joseph.8     Oaths  are  already  binding.9     Fornication  is 

1  Justin  Martyr,  it  is  true,  frequently  speaks  of  the  Patriarchs  as  observ- 
ing no  Sabbaths,  (See  e.  g.  Dial.  §  23  ;)  but  it  is  certain  that  his  meaning 
was,  that  the  Patriarchs  did  not  observe  the  Sabbaths  according  to  the  pe- 
culiar riles  of  the  Jewish  Law;  his  use  of  the  word  <m/?/?un'fnc  has  always  a 
reference  to  that  Law  ;  and  by  no  means  that  they  kept  no  Sabbaths  at  all. 
2  Gen.  vii.  2.  3  ibid.  viii.  20. 

«  lb.  ix.  4.  s  lb.  ix.  6;  xlii.  22.  6  lb.  xii.  18;   xxvi.  10. 

i  lb.  xlix.  4.  8  lb.  xxxix.  9.  »  lb.  xxvi.  28. 


PART    I.  BOOKS    OF    MOSES.  29 

already  condemned,  as  in  the  case  of  Shechem,  who  is 
said  "  to  have  wrought  folly  in  Israel,  which  thing  ought 
not  to  be  done."1  Marriage  with  the  uncircumcised  or 
idolater  is  already  prohibited.2  A  curse  is  already  de- 
nounced on  him  that  setteth  light  by  his  father  or  his  mo- 
ther.3 Purifications  are  already  enjoined  those  who 
approach  a  holy  place,  for  Jacob  bids  his  people  "  be  clean 
and  change  their  garments"  before  they  present  themselves 
at  Bethel.4  The  brother  is  already  commanded  to  marry 
the  brother's  widow,  and  to  raise  up  seed  unto  his  brother.5 
The  daughter  of  the  Priest  (if  Judah  as  the  head  of  his 
own  family  maybe  considered  in  that  character,  is  already 
to  be  brought  forth  and  burned,  if  she  played  the  harlot.6 
These  laws,  afterwards  incorporated  in  the  Levitical,  are 
here  brought  together  and  reviewed  at  a  glance ;  but  as 
they  occur  in  the  book  of  Genesis,  be  it  remembered,  they 
drop  out  incidentally,  one  by  one,  as  the  course  of  the  nar- 
rative happens  to  turn  them  up.  They  are  therefore  to  be 
reckoned  fragments  of  a  more  full  and  complete  code  which 
was  the  groundwork  in  all  probability  of  the  Levitical  code 
itself ;  for  it  is  difficult  to  suppose  that  where  there  were 
these  there  were  not  others  like  to  them.  But  this  is  not 
all — the  Patriarchs  had  their  sacrifices,  that  great  and 
leading  rite  of  the  Church  of  Aaron  ;  the  subjects  of  those 
sacrifices  fixed  ;  useless  without  the  shedding  of  blood  ;  for 
what  but  the  violation  of  an  express  command  full  of 
meaning,  could  have  constituted  the  sin  of  Cain  V  Their 
sacrifices,  how  far  regulated  in  their  details  by  the  injunc- 
tions of  God  himself,  we  cannot  determine  ;  yet  it  is  im- 

1  Gen.  xxxiv.  7. 

2  lb.  xxxiv.  14,  and  comp.  Exod.  xxxiv.  16,  and  Dr.  Patrick's  Comment. 

3  lb.  ix.  25,  and  comp.  Deut.  xxvii.  16.  *  Gen.  xxxv.  2. 
5  lb.  xxxviii.  8.                              e  lb.  xxxviii.  24. 

7  See  lb.  iii.  21 ;  iv.  4,  5.  7 

3* 


30  THE    VERACITY   OF    THE  PART    I. 

possible  to  read  in  the  15th  chapter  of  Genesis  the  particu- 
lars of  Abraham's  offering  of  the  heifer,  the  goat,  the  ram, 
the  turtle-dove,  and  the  pigeon — their  ages,  their  sex,  the 
circumspection  with  which  he  dissects  and  disposes  them — ■ 
whether  all  this  be  done  in  act  or  in  vision,  without  feeling 
assured  that  very  minute  directions  upon  all  these  points 
were  vouchsafed  to  the  Patriarchal  Church.  She  had 
her  SacrafJiejits  ;  for  sacrifice  of  which  I  have  just,  been 
speaking,  was  one,  and  circumcision  was  the  other. 

Then  as  she  had  her  sacrifices  and  sacraments,  so  had 
she  her  types — types  which  in  number  scarcely  yield  to 
those  of  the  Levitical  Law,  in  precision  and  interest  per- 
haps exceed  them.  For  we  meet  with  them  in  the  names 
and  fortunes  of  individuals  whom  the  Almighty  Disposer 
of  events,  without  doing  violence  to  the  natural  order  of 
things,  exhibits  as  pages  of  a  living  book  in  which  the 
Promise  is  to  be  read — as  characters  expressing  His  coun- 
sels and  covenants  writ  by  His  own  finger — as  actors^ 
whereby  he  holds  up  to  a  world,  not  yet  prepared  for  less 
gross  and  sensible  impressions,  scenes  to  come.  It  would 
lead  me  far  beyond  the  limits  of  my  argument  were  I  to 
touch  upon  the  multitude  of  instances,  which  will  crowd, 
however,  I  doubt  not,  upon  the  minds  of  my  readers.  I 
might  tell  of  Adam,  whom  St.  Paul  himself  calls  the  "fig- 
ure" or  type  "  of  Him  who  was  to  come."1  I  might  tell  of 
the  sacrifice  of  Isaac  (though  not  altogether  after  him 
whose  vision  upon  this  subject,  always  bright  though  often 
baseless,  would  alone  have  immortalized  his  name) — of 
that  Isaac  whose  birth  was  preceded  by  an  annunciation 
to  his  mother2 — whose  conception  was  miraculous3 — who 
was  named  of  the  angel  before  he  was  conceived  in  the 
womb4,  and  Joy,  or  Laughter,  or  Rejoicing  was  that  name5 

i  Rom.  v.  14;  1  Cor.  xv.  45.  2  Gen.  xviii.  10. 

3  Gen.  xviii.  14  *  lb.  xvii.  19.  5  d,  xxj  (j_ 


PART   I.  BOOKS    OF    MOSES. 


31 


who  was,  in  its  primary  sense,  the  seed  in  which  all  the 

nations  of  the  earth  were  to  be  blessed1— whose  projected 
death  was  a  rehearsal  (as  it  were),  almost  two  thousand 
years  beforehand,  of  the  great  offering  of  all— the  very 
mountain,  Moriah,  not  chosen  by  chance,  not  chosen  for 
convenience,  for  it  was  three  days'  journey  from  Abraham's 
dwelling-place,  but  no  doubt  appointed  of  God  as  the  future 
scene  of  a  Saviour's  passion  too2— a  son,  an  only  son  the 
victim — the  very  instruments  of  the  oblation,  the  wood, 
not  carried  by  the  young  men,  not  carried  by  the  ass  which 
they  had  brought  with  them,  but  laid  on  the  shoulders  of 
him  who  was  to  die,  as  the  cross  was  borne  up  that  same 
ascent  of  Him,  who,  in  the  fulness  of  time,  was  destined  to 
expire  upon  it.  But  indeed  I  see  the  Promise  all  Genesis 
through,  so  that  our  Lord  might  well  begin  with  Moses  in 
expounding  the  things  concerning  Himself;3  and  well 
might  Philip  say,  "  We  have  found  him  of  whom  Moses 
in  the  Law  did  write."4  I  see  the  Promise  all  Genesis 
through,  and  if  I  have  constructed  a  rude  and  imperfect 
Temple  of  Patriarchal  Worship  out  of  the  fragments  which 
offer  themselves  to  our  hands  in  that  history,  the  Messiah 
to  come  is  the  spirit  that  must  fill  that  Temple  with  His 
all-pervading  presence,  none  other  than  He  must  be  the 
Shekinah  of  the  Tabernacle  we  have  reared.  For  I  con- 
fess myself  wholly  at  a  loss  to  explain  the  nature  of  that 
Book  on  any  other  principle,  or  to  unlock  its  mysteries  by 
any  other  key.  Couple  it  with  this  consideration,  and  I 
see  the  scheme  of  Revelation,  like  the  physical  scheme, 
proceeding  with  beautiful  uniformity — an  unity  of  plan 
connecting  (as  it  has  been  well  said  by  Paley)  the  chicken 
roosting  upon  its  perch  with  the  spheres  revolving  in  the 

i  Gen.  xxii.  18.  2  lb.  xxii.  2;  2  Chron.  iii.  1. 

s  Luke  xxiv.  27.  4  John  i.  45. 


32  THE    VERACITY    OF   THE  PART    I. 

firmament ;  and  an  unity  of  plan  connecting  in  like  man- 
ner the  meanest  accidents  of  a  household  with  the  most 
illustrious  visions  of  a  prophet.  Abstracted  from  this  con- 
sideration, I  see  in  it  details  of  actions,  some  trifling,  some 
even  offensive,  pursued  at  a  length  (when  compared  with 
the  whole)  singularly  disproportionate  ;  while  things  which 
the  angels  would  desire  to  look  into  are  passed  over  and 
forgotten.  But  this  principle  once  admitted,  and  all  is 
consecrated — all  assumes  a  new  aspect — trifles  that  seem 
at  first  not  bigger  than  a  man's  hand,  occupy  the  heavens; 
and  wherefore  Sarah  laughed,  for  instance,  at  the  prospect 
of  a  son,  and  wherefore  that  laugh  was  rendered  immortal 
in  his  name,  and  wherefore  the  sacred  historian  dwells  on 
a  matter  so  trivial,  whilst  the  world  and  its  vast  concerns 
were  lying  at  his  feet,  I  can  fully  understand.  For  then  I 
see  the  hand  of  God  shaping  everything  to  his  own  ends, 
and  in  an  event  thus  casual,  thus  easy,  thus  unimportant, 
telling  forth  his  mighty  design  of  Salvation  to  the  world, 
and  working  it  up  into  the  wreb  of  his  noble  prospective 
counsels.1  I  see  that  nothing  is  great  or  little  before  Him 
who  can  bend  to  his  purposes  whatever  He  willeth,  and 
convert  the  light-hearted  and  thoughtless  mockery  of  an 
aged  woman  into  an  instrument  of  his  glory,  effectual  as 
the  tongue  of  the  seer  which  He  touched  with  living  coals 
from  the  altar.  Bearing  this  master-key  in  my  hand,  I  can 
interpret  the  scenes  of  domestic  mirth,  of  domestic  strata- 
gem, or  of  domestic  wickedness,  with  which  the  history  of 
Moses  abounds.  The  Seed  of  the  Woman  which  was  to 
bruise  the  Serpent's  head,2  however  indistinctly  understood, 
(and  probably  it  was  understood  very  indistinctly,)  was 
the  one  thing  longed  for  in  the  families  of  old,  was  "  the 
desire  of  all  nations,"  as  the  Prophet  Haggai  expressly  calls 

i  Gen.  xxi.  6.  2  Gen.  iii.  15. 


PART    I.  BOOKS    OF    MOSES. 


33 


it;1  and  provided  they  could  accomplish  this  desire,  they 
(like  others  when  urged  by  an  overpowering  motive)  were 
often  reckless  of  the  means,  and  rushed  upon  deeds  which 
they  could  not  defend.  Then  did  the  wife  forget  her  jeal- 
ousy, and  provoke,  instead  of  resenting,  the  faithlessness 
of  her  husband  ;2  then  did  the  mother  forget  a  mother's 
part,  and  teach  her  own  child  treachery  and  deceit  ;3  then  did 
daughters  turn  the  instincts  of  nature  backward,  and  delib- 
erately  work  their  own  and  their  fathers  shame  ;4  then  did 
the  daughter-in-law  veil  her  face,  and  court  the  incestuous 
bed  ;5  and  to  be  childless  was  to  be  a  bye-word  ;s  and  to 
refuse  to  raise  up  seed  to  a  brother  was  to  be  spit  upon  ;T 
and  the  prospect  of  the  Promise,  like  the  fulfilment  of  it, 
did  not  send  peace  into  families,  but  a  sword,  and  three 
wTere  set  against  two;  and  two  against,  three  ;8  and  the  elder 
who  would  be  promoted  unto  honor,  wag  set  against  the 
younger,  whom  God  would  promote,9  and  national  differ- 
ences were  engendered  by  it,  as  individuals  grew  into  na- 
tions ;10  and  even  the  foulest,  of  idolatries  maybe  traced, 
perhaps,  to  this  hallowed  source  ;  for  the  corruption  of  the 
best  is  the  worst  corruption  of  all."  It  is  upon  this  prin- 
ciple of  interpretation,  and  I  know  not  upon  what  other 
so  well,  that  we  may  put  to  silence  the  ignorance  of  foolish 
men,  who  have  made  those  parts  of  the  Mosaic  History 
a  stumbling-block  to  many,  which,  if  rightly  understood, 
are  the  very  testimony  of  the  covenant  ;  and  a  principle, 
which  is  thus  extensive  in  its  application  and  successful  in 
its  results,  which  explains  so  much  that  is  difficult,  and 
answers  so  much  that  is  objected  against,  has,  from  this 

1  Hag.  ii.  7.  2  Gen.  xvi.  2;  xxx.  3;  xxx.  9. 

3  lb.  xxv.  23;  xxvii.  13.  .       *  lb.  xix.  31.  *  lb.  xxxviii.  14. 

«  lb.  xvi.  5;  xxx.  1.  7  lb.  xxxviii.  26;  Deut.  xxv.  9. 

8  Gen.  xxvii.  41.  9  lb.  iv.  5  ;  xxvii.  41. 

10  lb.  xix.  37 ;  xxvi.  35.  »  Numb.  xxv.  1,  2,  3. 


34  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    I. 

circumstance  alone,  strong  presumption  in  its  favor,  strong 
claims  upon  our  sober  regard.1 

Such  is  the  structure  that  appears  to  me  to  unfold  itself, 
if  we  do  but  bring  together  the  scattered  materials  of 
which  it  is  composed.  The  place  of  worship — the  priest 
to  minister — the  sacerdotal  dress — the  ceremonial  forms 
—the  appointed  seasons  for  holy  things — preachers — 
prophets — a  code  of  laws — sacrifices — sacraments — types 
— and  a  Messiah  in  prospect,  as  leading  a  feature  of  the 
whole  scheme,  as  he  now  is  in  retrospect  of  a  scheme 
which  has  succeeded  it.  Complete  the  building  is  not,  but 
still  there  is  symmetry  in  its  component  parts,  and  unity 
in  its  whole.  Yet  Moses  was  certainly  not  contemplating 
any  description  of  a  Patriarchal  Church.  He  had  other 
matters  in  his  thoughts :  he  was  the  mediator  not  of  this 
system,  but  of  another,  which  he  was  now  to  set  forth  in 
all  its  details,  even  of  the  Levitical.  Hints,  however,  of 
a  former  dispensation  he  does  inadvertently  let  fall,  and 
these  we  find,  on  collecting  and  comparing  them,  to  be,  as 
far  as  they  go,  harmonious. 

Upon  this  general  view  of  the  Book  of  Genesis,  then, 
I  found  my  first  proof  of  consistency  without  design  in 
the  writings  of  Moses,  and  my  first  argument  for  their 
veracity — for  such  consistency  is  too  uniform  to  be  acci- 
dental, and  too  unobtrusive  to  have  been  studied.  Such 
a  view  is,  doubtless,  important  as  far  as  regards  the  doc- 
trines of  Scripture;  I,  however,  only  urge  it  as  far  as  re- 
gards the  evidences.  I  shall  now  enter  more  into  detail, 
and  bring  forward  such  specific  coincidences  amongst  in- 
dependent passages  of  the  Mosaic  writings,  as  tend  to  prove 
that  in  them  we  have  the  Word  of  Truth,  that  in  them  we 
may  put  our  trust  with  faith  unfeigned. 

1  See  Allix,  "  Reflections  on  the  Books  of  Holy  Scripture,"  where  this 
interesting  subject  is  most  ingeniously  pursued. 


PART    i.  BOOKS    OF    MOSES.  35 


II. 

In  the  18th  chapter  of  Genesis  we  find  recorded  a  very 
singular  conversation  which  Abraham  is  reported  to  have 
held  with  a  superior   Being,  there  called  the  Lord.     It 
pleased  God  on  this  occasion  to  communicate  to  the  Father 
of  the  Faithful  his  intention  to  destroy  forthwith  the  cities 
of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah,  of  which  the  cry  was  great,  and 
the  sin  very  grievous.     Now  the  manner  in  which  Abra- 
ham is  said  to  have  received  the  sad  tidings,  is  remarkable. 
He  does  not  bow  to  the  high  behest  in  helpless  acquies- 
cence__the  Lord  do  what  seemeth  good  in  his  sight— but, 
with  feelings  at  once  excited  to  the  uttermost,  he  pleads 
for  the  guilty  city,  he  implores  the  Lord  not  to  slay  the 
rigltteous  with  the  wicked';  and  when  he  feels  himself 
permitted  to  speak  with  all  boldness,  he  first  entreats  that 
fifty  good  men  may  purchase  the  city's  safety,  and,  still  en- 
couraged by  the  success  of  a  series  of  petitions,  he  rises  in 
his  merciful  demands,  till  at  last  it  is  promised  that  even 
if  ten  should  be  found  in  it,  it  should  not  be  destroyed  for 
ten's  sake. 

Now  was  there  no  motive  beyond  that  of  general  hu- 
manity which  urged  Abraham  to  entreaties  so  importu- 
nate, so  reiterated  1  None  is  named— perhaps  such  gen- 
eral motive  will  be  thought  enough— I  do  not  say  that  it 
was  not ;  yet  I  think  we  may  discover  a  special  and  ap- 
propriate one,  which  was  likely  to  act  upon  the  mind  of 
Abraham  with  still  greater  effect,  though  we  are  left  en- 
tirely to  detect  it  for  ourselves.  For  may  we  not  imagine, 
that  no  sooner  was  the  intelligence  sounded  in  Abraham's 
ears,  than  he  called  to  mind  that  Lot  his  nephew,  with  all 
his  family,  was  dwelling  in  this  accursed  town,1  and  that 

i  Gen.  xiv.  12. 


36  THE    VERACITY   OF    THE  PART  I. 

this  consideration  both  prompted  and  quickened  his  prayer  ? 
For  while  he  thus  made  his  supplication  for  Sodom,  I  do 
not  read  that  Gomorrah  and  the  other  cities  of  the  jjlain1 
shared  his  intercession,  though  they  stood  in  the  same  need 
of  it — and  why  not  ?  except  that  in  them  he  had  not  the 
same  deep  interest.  It  may  be  argued  too,  and  without 
any  undue  refinement,  that  in  his  repeated  reduction  of 
the  number  which  was  to  save  the  place,  he  was  governed 
by  the  hope  that  the  single  family  of  Lot  (for  he  had  sons- 
in-law  who  had  married  his  daughters,  and  daughters  un- 
married, and  servants,)  would  in  itself  have  supplied  so 
many  individuals  at  least  as  would  fulfil  the  last  condition 
—ten  righteous  persons  who  might  turn  away  the  wrath 
of  God,  nor  suffer  his  whole  displeasure  to  arise. 

Surely  nothing  could  be  more  natural  than  that  anxiety 
for  the  welfare  of  relatives  so  near  to  him  should  be  felt 
by  Abraham — nothing  more  natural  than  that  he  should 
make  an  effort  for  their  escape,  as  he  had  done  on  a  former 
occasion  at  his  own  risk,  when  he  rescued  this  very  Lot 
from  the  kings  who  had  taken  him  captive — nothing  more 
natural  than  that  his  family  feelings  should  discover  them- 
selves in  the  earnestness  of  his  entreaties — yet  we  have  to 
collect  all  this  for  ourselves.  The  whole  chapter  might  be 
read  without  our  gathering  from  it  a  single  hint  that  he 
had  any  relative  within  ten  days'  journey  of  the  place. 
All  we  know  is,  that  Abraham- entreated  for  it  with  great 
passion — that  he  entreated  for  no  other  place,  though  others 
were  in  the  same  peril — that  he  endeavored  to  obtain  such 
terms  as  seemed  likely  to  be  fulfilled  if  a  single  righteous 
family  could  be  found  there.  And  then  we  know,  from 
what  is  elsewhere  disclosed,  that  the  family  of  Lot  did  ac- 
tually dwell  there  at  that  time,  a  family  that  Abraham 

«  Gen.  lix.  28;  Jude,  7. 


PART    I.  BOOKS    OF    MOSES.  37 

might  well  have  reckoned  on  being  more  prolific  in  virtue 
than  it  proved. 

Surely,  then,  a  coincidence  between  the  zeal  of  the  uncle 
and  the  danger  of  the  brother's  son  is  here  detailed,  though 
it  is  not  expressed ;  and  so  utterly  undesigned  is  this  coin- 
cidence, that  the  history  might  be  read  many  times  over, 
and  this  feature  of  truth  in  it  never  happen  to  present 
itself. 

And  here  let  me  observe,  (an  observation  which  will  be 
very  often  forced  upon  our  notice  in  the  prosecution  of  this 
argument,)  that  this  sign  of  truth  (whatever  may  be  the 
importance  attached  to  it),  offers  itself  in  the  midst  of  an 
incident  in  a  great  measure  miraculous:  and  though  it 
cannot  be  said  that  such  indications  of  veracity  in  the  nat- 
ural parts  of  a  story,  prove  those  parts  of  it  to  be  true 
which  are  supernatural ;  yet  where  the  natural  and 
supernatural  are  in  close  combination,  the  truth  of  the 
former  must  at  least  be  thought  to  add  to  the  credibility 
of  the  latter ;  and  they  who  are  disposed  to  believe,  from 
the  coincidence  in  question,  that  the  petition  of  Abraham 
in  behalf  of  Sodom  was  a  real  petition,  as  it  is  described 
by  Moses,  and  no  fiction,  will  have  some  difficulty  in 
separating  it  from  the  miraculous  circumstances  connected 
with  it— the  visit  of  the  angel — the  prophetic  information 
he  conveyed — and  the  terrible  vengeance  with  which  he 
was  proceeding  to  smite  that  adulterous  and  sinful  genera- 
tion. 


III. 


The  24th  chapter  of  Genesis  contains  a  very  beautiful 
and  primitive  picture  of  Eastern  manners,  in  the  mission 
of  Abraham's  trusty  servant  to  Mesopotamia,  to  procure  a 
wife  for  Isaac  from  the  daughters  of  that  branch  of  the 

4 


38  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    I. 

Patriarch's  family  which  continued  to  dwell  in  Haran. 
He  came  nigh  to  the  city  of  Nahor — it  was  the  hour  when 
the  people  were  going  to  draw  water.  He  entreated  God 
to  give  him  a  token  whereby  he  might  know  which  of  the 
damsels  of  the  place  he  had  appointed  to  Isaac  for  a  wife. 
"  And  it  came  to  pass  that  behold  Rebekah  came  out,  who 
was  born  to  Bethuel,  son  of  Milcah,  the  wife  of  Nahor, 
Abraham's  brother,  with  her  pitcher  upon  her  shoulder." 
— :'  Drink,  my  lord,"  was  her  greeting,  "■  and  I  will  draw 
water  for  thy  camels  also."  This  was  the  simple  token 
which  the  servant  had  sought  at  the  hands  of  God ;  and 
accordingly  he  proceeds  to  impart  his  commission  to  her- 
self and  her  friends.  To  read  is  to  believe  this  story. 
But  the  point  in  it  to  which  I  beg  the  attention  of  my 
readers  is  this,  that  Rebekah  is  said  to  be,  "  the  daughter 
of  Bethuel,  the  son  of  Milcah  which  she  bare  unto  Nahor.11 
It  appears,  therefore,  that  the  grand-daughter  of  Abra- 
ham's brother  is  to  be  the  wife  of  Abraham's  son — i.e.  that 
a  person  of  the  third  generation  on  Nahor's  side  is  found 
of  suitable  years  for  one  of  the  second  generation  on  Abra- 
ham's side.  Now  what  could  harmonize  more  remarkably 
with  a  fact  elsewhere  asserted,  though  here  not  even 
touched  upon,  that  Sarah  the  wife  of  Abraham  was  for  a 
long  time  barren,  and  had  no  child  till  she  ivas  stricken 
in  years'!1  Thus  it  was  that  a  generation  on  Abraham's 
side  was  lost,  and  the  grand-children  of  his  brother  in 
Haran  were  the  co-evals  of  his  own  child  in  Canaan.  I 
must  say  that  this  trifling  instance  of  minute  consistency 
gives  me  very  great  confidence  in  the  veracity  of  the  his- 
torian. It  is  an  incidental  point  in  the  narrative — most 
easily  overlooked  —I  am  free  to  confess,  never  observed  by 
myself  till  I  examined  the  Pentateuch  with  a  view  to  this 

1  Gen.  xviii.  12. 


PART    I.  BOOKS    OF    MOSES. 


39 


species  of  internal  evidence.  It  is  a  point  on  which  he 
might  have  spoken  differently,  and  yet  not  have  excited 
the  smallest  suspicion  that  he  was  speaking  inaccurately. 
Suppose  he  had  said  that  Abraham's  son  had  taken  for 
a  wife  the  daughter  of  Nahor,  instead  of  the  grand- 
daughter, who  would  have  seen  in  this  anything  im- 
probable ?  and  to  a  mere  inventor  would  not  that  alli- 
ance have  been  much  the  more  likely  to  suggest  itself? 

Now  here,  again,  the  ordinary  and  extraordinary  are  so 
closely  united,  that  it  is  extremely  difficult  indeed  to  put 
them  asunder.     If,  then,  the  ordinary  circumstances  of 
the  narrative  have  the  impress  of  truth,  the  extraordinary 
have  a  very  valid  right  to  challenge  our  serious  considera- 
tion too.     If  the  coincidence  almost  establishes  this  as  a 
certain  fact,  which  I  think  it  does,  that  Sarah  did  not  bear 
Isaac  while  she  was  young,  agreeably  to  what  Moses  af- 
firms ;  is  it  not  probable  that  the  same  historian  is  telling 
the  truth  when  he  says,  that  Isaac  was  born  when  Sarah 
was  too  old  to  bare  him  at  all  except  by  miracle  ?— when 
he  says,  that  the  Lord  announced  his  future   birth,  and 
ushered  him  into  the  world  by  giving  him  a  name  fore- 
telling the  joy  he  should  be  to  the  nations  ;  changing  the 
names  of  both  his  parents  with  a  prophetic  reference  to 
the  high  destinies  this  son  was  appointed  to  fulfil  ? 

Indeed  the  more  attentively  and  scrupulously  we  ex- 
amine the  Scriptures,  the  more  shall  we  be  (in  my  opinion) 
convinced,  that  the  natural  and  supernatural  events  re- 
corded in  them  must  stand  or  fall  together.  The  spirit 
of  miracles  possesses  the  entire  body  of  the  Bible,  and  can- 
not be  cast  out  without  rending  in  pieces  the  whole  frame 
of  the  history  itself,  merely  considered  as  a  history. 


40  THE    VERACITY    OF   THE  PART    I. 


IV. 


There  is  another  indication  of  truth  in  this  same 
portion  of  patriarchal  story.  It  is  this — The  consistent 
insignificance  of  Bethuel  in  this  whole  affair.  Yet  he 
was  alive,  and  as  the  father  of  Rebekah  was  likely,  it 
might  have  been  thought,  to  have  been  a  conspicuous 
person  in  this  contract  of  his  daughter's  marriage.  For 
there  was  nothing  in  the  custom  of  the  country  to  warrant 
the  apparent  indifference  in  the  party  most  nearly  con- 
cerned, which  we  observe  in  Bethuel.  Laban  was  of  the 
same  country  and  placed  in  circumstances  somewhat  simi- 
lar ;  he  too  had  to  dispose  of  a  daughter  in  marriage,  and 
that  daughter  also,  like  Rebekah,  had  brothers  ;'  yet  in 
this  case  the  terms  of  the  contract  were  stipulated,  as  was 
reasonable,  by  the  father  alone  ;  he  was  the  active  person 
throughout.  But  mark  the  difference  in  tlie  instance  of 
Bethuel — whether  he  was  incapable  from  years  or  imbecil- 
ity to  manage  his  own  affairs,  it  is  of  course  impossible  to 
say,  but  something  of  this  kind  seems  to  be  implied  in  all 
that  relates  to  him.  Thus,  when  Abraham's  servant  meets 
with  Rebekah  at  the  well,  he  inquires  of  her,  "whose 
daughter  art  thou  ;  tell  me,  I  pray  thee,  is  there  room  in 
thy  father's  house  for  us  to  lodge  in?"2  She  answers,  that 
she  is  the  daughter  of  Bethuel,  and  that  there  is  room  ; 
and  when  he  thereupon  declared  who  he  was  and  whence 
he  came,  "  the  damsel  ran  and  told  them  of  her  mother's 
house  "  (not  of  her  father's  house,  as  Rachel  did  when 
Jacob  introduced  himself,)3  "  these  things."  This  might 
be  accident ;  but  "  Rebekah  had  a  brother"  the  history 
continues,  and  "  his  name  was  Laban,  and  Laban  ran 

i  Gen.  xrri.  1.  s  lb.  xxiv.  23.  3  lb.  xxix.  12. 


PART    I. 


BOOKS    OF    MOSES.  41 


out  unto  the  man  "  and  invited  him  in.1  Still  we  have  no 
mention  of  Bethuel.  The  servant  now  explains  the  na- 
ture of  his  errand,  and  in  this  instance  it  is  said,  that 
Laban  and  Bethuel  answered  ;2  Bethuel  being  here  in  this 
passage,  which  constitutes  the  sole  proof  of  his  being  alive, 
coupled  with  his  son  as  the  spokesman.  It  is  agreed,  that 
she  shall  go  with  the  man,  and  he  now  makes  his  pres- 
ents, but  to  whom  ?  "  Jewels  of  silver,  and  jewels  of  gold, 
and  raiment,  he  gave  to  Rebekah."  He  also  gave,  we  are 
told,  "  to  her  brother  and  to  her  mother  precious  things  ;"8 
but  not  it  seems  to  her  father ;  still  Bethuel  is  overlooked, 
and  he  alone.  It  is  proposed  that  she  shall  tarry  a  few 
days  before  she  departs.  And  by  whom  is  this  proposal 
made  ?  Not  by  her  father,  the  most  natural  person  surely 
to  have  been  the  principal  throughout  this  whole  affair ; 
but  "  by  her  brother  and  her  mother."*  In  the  next  gen- 
eration, when  Jacob,  the  fruit  of  this  marriage,  flies  to  his 
mother's  country  at  the  counsel  of  Rebekah  to  hide  him- 
self from  the  anger  of  Esau,  and  to  procure  for  himself 
a  wife,  and  when  he  comes  to  Haran  and  inquires  of  the 
shepherds  after  his  kindred  in  that  place,  how  does  he  ex- 
press himself?  "Know  ye,"  says  he,  "  Laban  the  son  of 
Nahor  T's  This  is  more  marked  than  even  the  former 
instances,  for  Laban  was  the  son  of  Bethuel,  and  only  the 
grandson  of  Nahor  ;  yet  still  we  see  Bethuel  is  passed 
over  as  a  person  of  no  note  in  his  own  family,  and  Laban 
his  own  child  designated  by  the  title  of  his  grandfather, 
instead  of  his  father. 

This  is  consistent — and  the  consistency  is  too  much  of 
one  piece  throughout,  and  marked  by  too  many  particu- 
lars, to  be  accidental.  It  is  the  consistency  of  a  man  who 
knew  more  about  Bethuel  than  we  do,  or  than  he  hap 

1  Gen.  xxiv.  29.  2  lb.  xxiv.  50.  3  lb.  xxiv.  53. 

4  lb.  xxiv.  55.  s  lb.  xxix.  5. 

4* 


42  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    I. 

pened  to  let  drop  from  his  pen.  It  is  of  a  kind,  perhaps, 
the  most  satisfactory  of  all  for  the  purpose  I  use  it,  because 
the  least  liable  to  suspicion  of  all.  The  uniformity  of  ex- 
pressive silence — repeated  omissions  that  have  a  meaning 
— no  agreement  in  a  positive  fact,  for  nothing  is  asserted ; 
yet  a  presumption  of  the  fact  conveyed  by  mere  negative 
evidence.  It  is  like  the  death  of  Joseph  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament, which  none  of  the  Evangelists  affirm  to  have 
taken  place  before  the  Crucifixion,  though  all  imply  it. 
This  kind  of  consistency  I  look  upon  as  beyond  the  reach 
of  the  most  subtle  contriver  in  the  world. 


V. 


On  the  return  of  this  servant  of  Abraham,  his  embassy 
fulfilled,  and  Rebekah  in  his  company,  he  discovers  Isaac 
at  a  distance,  who  was  gone  out  (as  our  translation  has  it) 
"  to  meditate"  or  (as  the  margin  has  it)  "  to  pray  in  the 
field  at  eventide."1 

Now  in  this  subordinate  incident  in  the  narrative  there 
are  marks  of  truth,  (very  slight  indeed  it  may  be,)  but 
still,  I  think,  if  not  obvious,  not  difficult  to  be  perceived 
and  not  unworthy  to  be  mentioned.  Isaac  went  out  to 
meditate  or  to  fray — but  the  Hebrew  word  does  not  relate 
to  religious  meditation  exclusively,  still  less  exclusively 
to  direct  prayer.  Neither  does  the  corresponding  expres- 
sion in  the  Septuagint  (dfioXeor^aot)  convey  either  of  these 
senses  exclusively,  the  latter  of  the  two  perhaps  not  at  all. 
The  leading  idea  suggested  seems  to  be  an  anxious,  a 
reverential,  a  painful,  a  depressed  state  of  mind — "  out  of 
the  abundance  of  my  complaint''1  (or  meditation,  for  the 

1  Gen.  xxiv.  G3,  riwb  pnsi  82*1 


PART    I.  BOOKS    OF    MOSES.  43 

word  is  the  same  here,  only  in  the  form  of  a  substantive,) 
"  out  of  the  abundance  of  my  meditation  and  grief  have 
I  spoken,"  are  the  words  of  Hannah  to  Eli.1  "  Who  hath 
woe,  who  hath  sorrow,  who  hath  contentions,  who  hath 
babbling,  (the  word  is  here  still  the  same  and  evidently 
might  be  rendered  with  more  propriety  melancholy.)  who 
hath  wounds  without  cause,  who  hath  redness  of  eyes  ?"2 
Isaac  therefore  went  out  into  the  field  not  directly  to  pray, 
but  to  give  ease  to  a  wounded  spirit  in  solitude.  Now 
the  occasion  of  this  his  trouble  of  mind  is  not  pointed  out, 
and  the  passage  indeed  has  been  usually  explained  with- 
out any  reference  to  such  a  feeling,  and  merely  as  an  in- 
stance of  religious  contemplation  in  Isaac  worthy  of  imita- 
tion by  all.  But  one  of  the  last  things  thait  is  recorded  to 
have  happened  before  the  servant  went  to  Haran,  whence 
he  was  now  returning,  is  the  death  and  burial  of  Sarah, 
no  doubt  a  tender  mother  (as  she  proved  herself  a  jealous 
one),  to  the  child  of  her  old  age  and  her  only  child.  What 
more  likely  than  that  her  loss  was  the  subject  of  Isaac's 
mournful  meditation  on  this  occasion  ?  But  this  conjec- 
ture is  reduced  almost  to  certainty  by  a  few  words  inciden- 
tally dropped  at  the  end  of  the  chapter ;  for  having  lifted 
up  his  eyes  and  beheld  the  camels  coming,  and  the  ser- 
vant, and  the  maiden,  Isaac  "  brought  her  into  his  mother 
Sarah's  tent,  and  took  Rebekah  and  she  became  his  wTife  ; 
and  he  loved  her,  and  was  comforted  after  his  motliefs 
death:* 

The  agreement  of  this  latter  incident  with  what  had 
gone  before  is  not  set  forth  in  our  version,  and  a  scene  of 
very  touching  and  picturesque  beauty  impaired,  if  not 
destroyed. 

1  1  Sam.  i.  16.  2  Prov.  xxiii.  29.  3  Gen.  xxiv.  67. 


44  THE    VERACITY    OP   THE  PART    I. 

VI. 

We  have  now  to  contemplate  Isaac  in  a  different  scene, 
and  to  remove  with  him  (after  the  fashion  of  this  earthly 
pilgrimage),  from  an  occasion  of  mirth  to  one  of  mourn- 
ing. 

Being  now  grown  old,  as  he  says,  and  "  not  knowing 
the  day  of  his  death"  he  prepares  to  bless  his  first-born 
son  "before  he  dies."1  So  spake  the  Patriarch.  This 
looks  very  like  one  of  the  last  acts  of  a  life  which  time 
and  natural  decay  had  brought  near  its  close  ;  yet  it  is  cer- 
tain that  Isaac  -continued  to  live  a  great  many  years  after 
this,  nay,  that  probably  a  fourth  part  of  his  whole  life  yet 
remained  to  him — for  he  was  still  alive  when  Jacob  re- 
turned from  Mesopotamia ;  when  even  many  of  Jacob's-sons 
were  grown  up  to  manhood  who  were  as  yet  in  the  loins 
of  their  father  ;2  and  even  after  that  Patriarch  had  re- 
peatedly migrated  from  dwelling-place  to  dwelling-place  in 
the  land  of  Canaan.  For  "  Jacob,"  we  read  when  all  these 
other  events  had  been  related  in  their  order,  "  came  unto 
Isaac  his  father,  unto  Mamie,  unto  the  city  of  Arbah, 
which  is  Hebron,  where  Abraham  and  Isaac  sojourned.3" 

How  then  is  this  seeming  discrepancy  to  be  got  over? 
I  mean,  the  discrepancy  between  Isaac's  anxiety  to  bless 
his  son  before  he  died,  and  the'  fact  of  his  being  found 
alive  perhaps  forty  or  fifty  years  afterwards  ?  My  answer 
is  tins — that  it  was  probably  at  a  moment  of  dangerous 
sickness  when  he  bethought  himself  of  imparting  the 
blessing — and  I  feel  my  conjecture  supported  by  the  fol- 
lowing minute  coincidences.  That  Isaac  was  then  de 
sirous  to  have  "  savory  meat  such  as  he  loved,"  as  though 
he  loathed  his  ordinary  food  :  that  Jacob  bade  him  "  arise 

1  Gen.  xxvii.  2,  4.  2  lb.  xxxiv.  5.  3  lb.  xxxv.  27. 


PART    I.  BOOKS    OF    MOSES.  45 

and  sit  that  he  might  eat  of  his  venison,"  as  though  he 
was  at  the  time  stretched  upon  his  bed  ;  that  he  "  trembled 
very  exceedingly"  when  Esau  came  in  and  he  was  ap- 
prised of  his  mistake,  as  though  he  was  very  weak ;  that 
the  words  of  Esau,  when  he  said  in  his  heart  "  the  days 
of  mourning  for  my  father  are  at  hand,"  are  as  though 
he  was  thought  sick  unto  death ;  and  that  those  of  Re- 
bekah,  when  she  said  unto  Jacob  "  should  I  be  deprived 
of  you  both  in  one  day,"  are  as  though  she  supposed  the 
time  of  her  widowhood  to  be  near. 

I  will  add  that  the  prolongation  of  Isaac's  life  unex- 
pectedly (as  it  should  seem),  may  have  had  its  influence 
in  the  continued  protection  of  Jacob  from  Esau's  anger, 
the  latter,  even  in  the  first  burst  of  his  passion,  retaining 
that  reverence  for  his  father  which  determined  him  to  put 
off  the  execution  of  his  evil  purposes  against  Jacob,  till  he 
should  be  no  more.  And  this  affection  seems  to  have  been 
felt  by  him  to  the  last ;  for  wild  and  wandering  as  was 
his  life,  the  sword  or  the  bow  ever  in  his  hand,  we  never- 
theless find  him  anxious  to  do  honor  to  his  father's  grave, 
and  assisting  Jacob  at  the  burial.1  The  filial  feelings 
therefore  which  had  stayed  his  hand  at  first,  were  still 
tending  to  soothe  him  during  Jacob's  absence,  and  to  pro- 
pitiate him  on  Jacob's  return ;  for  the  days  of  mourning 
for  his  father  were  still  not  come. 


VII. 

My  next  coincidence  may  not  be  thought  in  itself  so 
convincing  as  some  others,  yet  as  it  at  once  furnishes  an 
argument  for  the  truth  of  Genesis  and  an  answer  to  an 

1  Gen.  xxxv.  29. 


46  THE    VERACITY   OF   THE  PART    I. 

objection,  I  will  not  pass  it  over.  When  Jacob  is  about  to 
remove  with  his  family  to  Beth-el.  a  place  already  conse- 
crated in  his  memory  by  the  vision  of  angels,  and  thence- 
forward to  be  distinguished  by  an  altar  to  his  God,  he  gives 
the  following  extraordinary  command  to  his  household  and 
all  that  are  with  him  :  "  Put  away  the  strange  gods  that 
are  among  you,  and  be  clean,  and  change  your  garments  j"1 
or  as  it  might  be  translated  with  perhaps  more  closeness, 
"  the  gods  of  the  stranger."  Had  Jacob,  then,  hitherto 
tolerated  the  worship  of  idols  among  his  attendants  ? 
Had  he  connived  so  long  at  a  defection  from  the  God  of 
his  fathers,  even  whilst  he  was  befriended  by  Him,  whilst 
he  was  living  under  his  special  protection,  whilst  he  was  in 
frequent  communication  with  Him  ?  This  is  hard  to  be 
believed  ;  indeed  it  would  have  seemed  incredible  altogether, 
had  it  not  been  remembered  that  Rachel  had  Images' 
which  she  stole  from  her  father  Laban,  and  which  he  at 
least  considered  as  his  household  gods.  Those  images, 
however,  might  be  taken  by  Rachel  as  valuables,  silver  or 
gold  perhaps,  a  fair  prize  as  she  might  think,  serving  to  bal- 
ance the  portion  which  Laban  had  withheld  from  her,  and 
the  money  which  he  had  devoured.  That  she  used  them 
herself  as  idols  does  not.  appear,  but  rather  the  contrary — 
and  that  Jacob  was  perfectly  unconscious  of  their  being 
at  all  in  his  camp,  whether  as  objects  of  worship  or  as  ob- 
jects of  value,  is  evident  from  his  giving  Laban  free  leave 
to  put  to  death  the  party  on  whom  they  should  be  found.2 
He  therefore  was  not  an  idolater  himself;  nor,  as  far  as 
we  know,  did  he  wink  at  idolatry  in  those  about  him. 
"Whence  then  this  command,  issued  to  his  attendants  on 
their  approach  to  Beth-el,  that  holy  ground,  "to  put  away 
the  strange  gods  that  were  amongst  them,  and  to  make 
themselves  clean  ?" 

I  Gen  xxxv.  2.  s  Ibid.  xxxi.  32. 


PART  I.  BOOKS    OF    MOSES.  47 

Let  us  only  refer  to  an  event  of  a  former  chapter,1  and 
all  is  plain.  The  sons  of  Jacob  had  just  been  destroying 
the  city  of  the  Shechemites — they  had  slain  the  males,  but 
"  all  their  wealth,  and  all  their  little  ones,  and  their  wives 
took  they  captive,  and  spoiled  all  that  was  in  the  house." 
These  captives,  then,  so  lately  added  to  the  company  of 
Jacob,  were  in  all  probability  the  strangers  alluded  to, 
and  the  idols  in  their  possession  the  gods  of  the  strangers, 
which  accordingly  the  Patriarch  required  them  to  put 
away  forthwith  before  Beth-el  was  approached.  Moreover, 
it  may  be  observed,  that  the  terms  of  the  command  extend 
to  "  all  that  were  with  hipi,"  which  may  well  have  respect 
to  the  recent  augmentation  of  his  numbers,  by  the  addition 
of  the  Shechemite  prisoners  :  and  the  further  injunction, 
that  not  only  the  idols  were  to  be  put  away,  but  that  all 
were  to  be  clean  and  change  their  garments,  may  have 
alike  respect  to  the  recent  slaughter  of  that  people,  whereby 
all  who  were  concerned  in  it  were  polluted. 

Yet  surely  nothing  can  be  more  incidental  than  the  con- 
nection between  the  sacking  of  the  city,  and  the  subse- 
quent command  to  put  the  idols  of  the  stranger  away— 
though  nothing  can  be  more  natural  and  satisfactory  than 
that  connection  when  it  is  once  perceived.  Indeed  so  little 
solicitous  is  Moses  to  point  out  these  two  events  as  cause 
and  consequence,  that  he  has  left  himself  open  to  miscon- 
struction by  the  very  unguarded  and  artless  manner  in 
which  he  expresses  himself,  and  has  even  placed  the  char- 
acter of  Jacob,  as  an  exclusive  worshipper  of  the  true  God, 
unintentionally  in  jeopardy. 

1  Gen.  xxxiv. 


48  THE    VERACITY    OF   THE  PART    I. 


VIII. 

In  the  character  of  Jocob  I  see  an  individuality  which 
marks  it  to  belong  to  real  life :  and  this  is  my  next  argu- 
ment for  the  veracity  of  the  writings  of  Moses.  The  par- 
ticulars we  read  of  him  are  consistent  with  each  other,  and 
with  the  lot  to  which  he  was  born  ;  for  this  more  or  less 
models  the  character  of  every  man.  The  lot  of  Jacob  had 
not  fallen  upon  the  fairest  of  grounds.  Life,  especially  the 
former  part  of  it,  did  not  run  so  smoothly  with  him  as  with 
his  father  Isaac — so  that  he  might  be  templed  to  say  to 
Pharaoh  towards  the  close  of  it  naturally  enough,  that 
'•  the  days  of  the  years  of  it  had  been  evil."  The  faults  of 
his  youth  had  been  visited  upon  his  manhood  with  retrib- 
utive justice  not  unfrequent  in  God's  moral  government  of 
the  world,  where  the  very  sin  by  which  a  man  offends  is 
made  the  rod  by  which  he  is  corrected.  Rebekah's  undue 
partiality  for  her  younger  son,  which  leads  her  to  deal  cun- 
ningly for  his  promotion  unto  honor,  works  for  her  the 
loss  of  that  son  for  the  remainder  of  her  days — his  own 
unjust  attempts  at  gaining  the  superiority  over  his  elder 
brother,  entail  upon  him  twenty  years  slavery  in  a  foreign 
land — and  the  arts  by  which  he  had  made  Esau  to  suffer, 
arc  precisely  those  by  which  he  suffers  himself  at  the  hands 
of  Laban.  Of  this  man,  the  first  thing  we  hear  is,  his 
entertainment  of  Abraham's  servant  when  he  came  on  his 
errand  to  Rcbekah.  Hospitality  was  the  virtue  of  his  age 
and  country  ;  in  his  case,  however,  it  seems  to  have  been 
no  little  stimulated  by  the  sight  of  "  the  earring  and  the 
bracelets  on  his  sister's  hands.'*  which  the  servant  had 
already  given  her1 — so  he   speedily  made  room  for  the 

1  Gen.  xiiv.  30. 


PART    I.  BOOKS    OF    MOSES.  49 

camels.  He  next  is  presented  to  us  as  beguiling  that  sis- 
ter's son,  who  had  sought  a  shelter  in  his  house,  and  whose 
circumstances  placed  him  at  his  mercy,  of  fourteen  years 
service,  when  he  had  covenanted  with  him  for  seven  only — 
endeavoring  to  retain  his  labor  when  he  would  not  pay 
him  his  labor's  worth — himself  devouring  the  portion  which 
he  should  have  given  to  his  daughters,  counting  them  but 
as  strangers.1  Compelled  at  length  to  pay  Jacob  wages, 
he  changes  them  ten  times,  and  in  the  spirit  of  a  crafty 
griping  worldling,  makes  him  account  for  whatever  of  the 
flock  was  torn  of  beasts  or  stolen,  whether  by  day  or  night. 
When  Jacob  flies  from  this  iniquitous  service  with  his  fam- 
ily and  cattle,  Laban  still  pursues  and  persecutes  him,  in- 
tending, if  his  intentions  had  not  been  over-ruled  by  a 
mightier  hand,  to  send  him  away  empty,  even  after  he 
had  been  making,  for  so  long  a  period,  so  usurious  a  profit 
of  him. 

I  think  it  was  to  be  expected,  that  one  who  had  been 
disciplined  in  such  a  school  as  this,  and  for  such  a  season, 
woidd  not  come  out  of  it  without  bearing  about  him  its 
marks  ;  and  that  oppressed  first  by  the  just  fury  of  his 
brother,  which  put  his  life  in  hazard,  and  drove  him  into 
exile,  and  then  still  more  by  the  continued  tyranny  of  a 
father-in-law,  such  as  we  have  seen,  Jacob  should  have 
learned,  like  maltreated  animals,  to  have  the  fear  of  man 
habitually  before  his  eyes.  Now  that  it  was  so,  is  evident 
from  all  the  latter  part  of  his  history. 

He  is  afraid  that  Laban  will  not  let  him  go,  and  there- 
fore takes  the  jyrecaution  to  steal  from  him  unawares, 
when  he  is  gone  to  a  distance  to  shear  his  sheep.  He  ap- 
proaches the  borders  of  Edom,  but  here  the  ancient  dread 
of  his  brother  revives,  and  he  takes  the  precaution  to  pro- 

1  Gen.  xxxi.  15. 
5 


/ 


50  THE    VERACITY   OF   THE  PART    I. 

pitiate  him  or  to  escape  him  by  measures  which  breathe 
the  spirit  of  the  man  in  a  singular  manner.  He  sends 
him  a  message — it  is  from  "  Jacob  thy  servant"  to  "  Esau 
my  lord."  Esau  advances,  and  he  at  once  fears  the  worst. 
Then  does  he  divide  his  people  and  substance  into  two 
bands,  that  if  the  one  be  smitten,  the  other  may  escape — 
he  provides  a  present  of  many  cattle  for  his  brother — he 
commands  his  servants  to  put  a  space  between  each  drove, 
apparently  to  add  effect  to  the  splendor  of  his  present — he 
charges  them  to  deliver  severally  their  own  portion,  with 
the  tidings  that  he  was  behind  who  sent  it — he  appoints 
their  places  to  the  women  and  children  with  the  same  pru- 
dential considerations  that  mark  his  whole  conduct ;  first 
the  handmaids  and  their  children  ;  then  Leah  and  her 
children  ;  and  in  the  hindermost  and  least  exposed  place, 
his  favorite  Rachel  and  Joseph.  Such  are  his  precautions. 
They  are  all  however  needless — Esau  owes  him  no  wrong 
— he  even  proposes  to  escort  him  home  in  peace,  or  to 
leave  him  a  guard  out  of  the  four  hundred  men  that  were 
with  him.  But  Jacob  evades  both  proposals ;  apprehend- 
ing, most  likely,  more  danger  from  his  friends  than  from 
his  foes  ;  and  dismisses  his  brother  with  a  word  about  "  fol- 
lowing my  lord  to  Seir  ;"  an  intention  which,  as  far  as  we 
know,  he  was  in  more  haste  to  express  than  accomplish. 
All  this  ended,  the  honor  of  his  house  is  violated  by  She- 
chem,  a  son  of  a  prince  of  that  country.  Even  this  insult 
does  not  throw  him  off  his  guard.  He  heard  it,  "but  he 
held  his  peace"  till  his  sons,  who  were  with  the  cattle  in 
the  field,  should  come  home.  They  soon  proceed  to  take 
summary  vengeance  on  the  Shechemit.es.  The  fear  of 
man,  however,  which  had  restrained  the  wrath  of  Jacob 
at  the  first,  besets  him  still,  and  he  now  says  to  his  sons — 
"  Ye  have  troubled  me  to  make  me  to  stink  among  the 
inhabitants  of  the  land  ;  and  I  being  few  in  number,  they 


PART    I.  BOOKS    OF    MOSES.  51 

shall  gather  themselves  together  against  me  and  slay  me ; 
and  I  shall  be  destroyed,  I  and  my  house."1  Jacob  would 
have  been  better  pleased  with  more  compromise  and  less 
cruelty — he  was  not  prepared  to  give  utterance  to  that 
feeling  of  turbulent  indignation,  reckless  of  all  conse- 
quences, which  spake  in  the  words  of  Simeon  and  Levi. 
"Shall  he  deal  with  our  sister  as  with  an  harlot?''  Here 
again,  however,  his  fears  proved  groundless.  Many  years 
now  pass  away,  but  when  we  meet  him  once  more  he  is 
still  the  same — the  same  leading  feature  in  his  character 
continues  to  the  last.  His  sons  go  down  into  Egypt  for 
corn  in  the  famine — they  return  with  an  injunction  from 
Joseph  to  take  back  with  them  Benjamin,  or  else  to  see 
his  face  no  more.  This  is  urged  upon  Jacob,  and  the  re- 
ply it  extorts  from  him  is  in  strict  keeping  with  all  that 
has  gone  before  : — "  Wherefore  dealt  ye  so  ill  with  me,  as 
to  tell  the  man  whether  ye  had  yet  a  brother  ?"2  Still  we 
see  one  whom  suffering  had  rendered  distrustful — who 
would  lend  many  his  ear,  but  few  his  tongue.  The  fam- 
ine presses  so  sore,  that  there  is  no  alternative  but  to 
yield  up  his  son.  Still  he  is  the  same  individual.  Judah 
is  in  haste  to  be  gone — he  will  be  surety  for  the  lad — he 
will  bring  him  again,  or  bear  the  blame  forever.  But 
Jacob  gives  little  heed  to  these  vaporing  promises  of  a 
sanguine  adviser,  and  as  stooping  before  a  necessity  which 
was  too  strong  for  him,  he  prudently  sets  himself  to  devise 
means  to  disarm  the  danger ;  and  "  if  it  must  be  so  now," 
says  he,  "  do  this,  take  of  the  best  fruits  of  the  land  in 
your  vessels,  and  carry  down  the  man  a  present,  a  little 
balm  and  a  little  honey,  spices  and  myrrh,  nuts  and  al- 
monds— and  take  double  money  in  your  hand  ;  and  the 
money  that  was  brought  again  in  the  mouth  of  your  sacks, 

1  Gen.  xxxiv.  30.  »  lb.  xliii.  6. 


52  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    I. 

carry  it  again  in  your  hand  ;  peradventure  it  was  an  over- 
sight."1 

1  cannot  persuade  myself  that  these  are  not  marks  of  a 
real  character — especially  when  I  consider  that  this  iden- 
tity is  found  in  incidents  spread  over  a  period  of  a  hundred 
years  or  more — that  they  are  mere  hints,  as  it  were,  out 
of  which  we  are  left  to  construct  the  man ;  hints  inter- 
rupted by  a  multitude  of  other  matters ;  the  geneal- 
ogy and  adventures  of  Esau  and  his  Arab  tribes;  the 
household  affairs  of  Potiphar ;  the  dreams  of  Pharaoh  ; 
the  polity  of  Egypt — that  the  facts  thus  dispersed  and 
broken  are  to  be  brought  together  by  ourselves,  and  the 
general  induction  to  be  drawn  from  them  by  ourselves, 
nothing  being  more  remote  from  the  mind  of  Moses  than 
to  present  us  with  a  portrait  of  Jacob  ;  nay,  that  of  Isaac, 
who  happens  to  be  less  involved  in  the  circumstances  of 
his  history,  he  scarcely  gives  us  a  single  feature.  Surely, 
with  all  this  before  us.  it  is  impossible  to  entertain  the  idea 
for  a  moment  of  any  studied  uniformity.  Yet  an  uni- 
formity there  is  ;  casual,  therefore,  on  the  part  of  Moses, 
who  was  thinking  nothing  about  it — but  complete,  because, 
without  thinking  about  it,  he  was  by  some  means  or  other 
drawing  from  the  life.  *£§& 

And  now  am  I  thought  to  disparage  the  character  of 
this  holy  man  of  old  ?  God  forbid  !  I  think  that  in  the 
incidents  I  have  named  his  conduct  may  be  excused,  if  not 
justified.  But  were  it  otherwise,  I  am  not  aware  that  any 
of  the  Patriarchs  has  been  set  up,  or  can  be  set  up,  as  a 
genuine  pattern  of  Christian  morals.  They  saw  the 
Promise,  (and  the  more  questionable  parts  of  Jacob's  con- 
duct are  to  be  accounted  for  by  his  impatience  to  obtain 
the  Promise,  and    by  his   consequently   using  unlawful 

Gen.  iliii.  12. 


PART    I.  BOOKS    OP    MOSES.  53 

means  to  obtain  it.)  but  "  they  saw  it  afar  oil" — -"  they 
beheld  it,  but  not  nigh."  They  lived  under  a  code  of  laws 
that  were  not  absolutely  good,  perhaps  not  so  good  as  the 
Levitical,  for  as  this  was  but  a  preparation  for  the  more 
perfect  Law  of  Christ,  so  possibly  was  the  Patriarchal  but 
a  preparation  for  the  more  perfect  Law  of  Moses.  Indeed 
I  have  already  observed,  that  many  scattered  hints  may 
be  gathered  from  this  latter  law,  which  show  that  it  was 
but  the  Law  under  which  the  Patriarchs  had  lived  re- 
constructed, augmented,  and  improved—and  I  apprehend 
that  such  a  scheme  of  progressive  advancement,  first  the 
dawn,  then  the  clay,  then  the  perfect  day,  is  analogous  to 
God's  dealings  in  general.  But  the  broad  light  in  which 
the  Fathers  of  Israel  are  to  be  viewed  is  this,  that  they 
were  exclusive  worshippers  of  the  One  True  Everlasting 
God,  in  a  world  of  idolaters — that  they  were  living  de- 
positaries of  the  great  doctrine  of  the  Unity  of  the  God- 
head, when  the  nations  around  were  resorting  to  every 
green  tree — that  they  "  were  faithful  found  among  the 
faithless."  And  so  incalculably  important  was  the  preser- 
vation of  this  Great  Article  of  the  Creed  of  man,  at  a  time 
when  it  rested  in  the  keeping  of  so  few,  that  the  language 
of  the  Almighty  in  the  Law  seems  ever  to  have  a  respect 
unto  it :  fury,  anger,  indignation,  jealousy,  hatred,  being 
expressions  rarely,  if  ever,  attributed  to  him,  except  in  ref- 
erence to  idolatry — and,  on  the  other  hand,  enemies  of 
God,  adversaries  of  God,  haters  of  God,  being  there — 
chiefly  and  above  all,  idolaters.  But  in  this  sense  God 
was  emphatically  the  God  of  Abraham,  the  God  of  Isaac, 
and  the  God  of  Jacob :  none  of  them,  not  even  the  last, 
(for  the  only  passage  which  savors  of  the  contrary  admits, 
as  we  have  seen,  of  easy  explanation,)  having  ever  for- 
feited their  claim  to  this  high  and  glorious  title ;  however, 

5* 


54  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    I. 

such  title  may  not  be  thought  to  imply  that  their  moral 
characters  and  conduct  were  faultless,  and  worthy  of  all 
acceptation. 


IX 


The  marks  of  coincidence  without  design,  which  I  have 
brought  forward  to  prove  the  truth  of  the  Books  of  Moses 
as  successively  presenting  themselves  in  the  history  of 
Abraham,  of  Isaac,  and  of  Jacob,  I  shall  now  follow  up  by 
others  in  the  history  of  Joseph. 

By  the  ill-concealed  partiality  of  his  father,  and  his  own 
incaution  in  declaring  his  dreams  of  future  greatness, 
Joseph  had  incurred  the  hatred  of  his  brethren.  They 
were  feeding  the  flock  near  Shechem — Jacob  desires  to 
satisfy  himself  of  their  welfare,  and  sends  Joseph  to  in- 
quire of  them  and  to  bring  him  word  again.  Meanwhile 
they  had  driven  further  a-field  to  Dothan,  and  Joseph,  in- 
formed of  this  by  a  man  whom  he  found  wandering  in 
the  country,  followed  them  thither.  They  beheld  him 
when  he  was  yet  afar  off;  his  dress  was  remarkable,1  and 
the  eye  of  the  shepherd  in  the  plain  country  of  the  East, 
like  that  of  the  mariner  now,  was  no  doubt  practised  and 
keen.  They  take  their  counsel  together  against  him. 
They  conclude,  however,  not  to  stain  their  hands  in  the 
blood  of  their  brother,  but  to  cast  him  into  an  empty  pit, 
which,  in  those  countries,  where  the  inhabitants  were 
constantly  engaged  in  a  fruitless  search  for  water,  was  a 
very  likely  place  to  be  on  the  spot.  There  he  was  to  be 
left  to  die,  or,  as  Reuben  intended,  to  remain  till  he  could 
rid  him  out  of  their  hands.  Nothing  could  be  more  artless 
than    this   story.     Nothing   can    bear    more   indisputable 

1  Gen.  xxxvii.  3. 


PART    I.  BOOKS    OF    MOSES. 


55 


signs  of  truth  than  its  details.     But  the  circumstance,  on 
which  I  now  rest,  is  another  that  is  mentioned.     The 
brothers  having  achieved  their  evil  purpose,  sat  down  to 
eat  bread— possibly  some  household  present  which  Jacob 
had  sent  them,  and  Joseph  had  just  conveyed,  such  as  on 
a  somewhat  similar  occasion,  in  after-times,  Jesse  sent  and 
David  conveyed  to  his  elder  brethren  in  the  camp— though 
on  this,  as  on  a  thousand  touches  of  truth  of  the  like  kind, 
the  reader  of  Moses  is  left  to  make  his  own  speculations. 
And  now  "  they  lifted  up  their  eyes  and  looked,  and  behold 
a  company  of  Ishmaelites  came  from  Gilead  with  their 
camels,  bearing  spicery  and  balm  and  myrrh,  going  to 
carry  it   down   to  Egypt:11     Now  this,  though  by  no 
means  an  obvious  incident  to  have  suggested  itself,  does 
seem  to  me  a  very  natural  one  to  have  occurred ;    and 
what  is  more,  is  an  incident  which  tallies  remarkably  well 
with  what  we  read  elsewhere,  in  a  passage  however  hav- 
ing no  reference  whatever  to  the  one  in  question.     For 
have  we  not  reason  to  know,  that  at  this  very  early  period 
in  the  history  of  the  world,  this  first  of  caravans  upon 
record  was  charged  with   a  cargo  for  Egypt  singularly 
adapted    to  the  wants  of  the  Egyptians  at  that  time? 
Expunge  the  2nd  and  3rd  verses  of  the  50th  chapter  of 
Genesis,  and  the  symptoms  of  veracity  in  the  narrative 
which  I  here  detect,  or  think  I  detect,  would  never  have 
been  discoverable.     But  in  those  verses  I  am  told  that 
Joseph  commanded  the  Physicians  to  embalm  his  father 
—and  the  Physicians  embalmed  Israel— and  forty  days 
were  fulfilled  to  him  ;   for  so  are  fulfilled  the  days  of  those 
which  are  embalmed,  and  the  Egyptians  mourned  three- 
score and  ten  days."     I  conclude,  therefore,  from  this,  that 
in  these  very  ancient  times   it  was  the  practice  of  the 

i  Gen.  xxxvii.  25. 


56  THE    VERACITY    OF   THE  PART    I. 

Egyptians  (for  Joseph  was  here  doing  that  which  was  the 
custom  of  the  country  where  he  lived),  to  embalm  their 
dead — and  we  know  from  the  case  of  our  Lord  that  an 
hundred  pounds  weight  of  myrrh  and  aloes  was  not  more 
than  enough  for  a  single  body.1  Hence,  then,  the  camel- 
loads  of  spices  which  the  Ishmaelites  were  bringing  from 
Gilead,  would  naturally  enough  find  an  ample  market  in 
Egypt.  Now,  is  it  easy  to  come  to  any  other  conclusion 
when  trifles  of  this  kind  drop  out,  fitted  one  to  another 
like  the  corresponding  parts  of  a  cloven  tally,  than  that 
both  are  true  ? — that  the  historian,  however  he  obtained 
his  intelligence,  is  speaking  of  particulars  which  fell  within 
his  own  knowledge,  and  is  speaking  of  them  faithfully  1 
Surely  nothing  can  be  more  incidental  than  the  mention 
of  the  lading  of  these  camels  of  the  Ishmaelites — it  has 
nothing  to  do  with  the  main  fact,  which  is  merely  this, 
that  the  party,  whoever  they  were,  and  whatever  they 
were  bent  upon,  were  ready  to  buy  Joseph,  and  that  his 
brethren  were  ready  to  sell  him.  On  the  other  hand  no 
one  can  suspect,  that  when  Moses  relates  Joseph  to  have 
caused  his  father's  body  to  be  embalmed,  he  had  an  eye  to 
corroborating  his  account  of  the  adventure  which  he  had 
already  told  concerning  the  Ishmaelitish  merchants,  who 
might  thus  seem  occupied  in  a  traffic  that  was  appropriate. 
I  think  that  this  single  coincidence  would  induce  an  un- 
prejudiced person  to  believe,  that  the  ordinary  parts  of 
this  story  are  matters  of  fact  fully  known  to  the  historian, 
and  accurately  reported  by  him.  Yet  it  is  an  integral 
portion  of  this  same  story,  uttered  by  the  same  historian, 
that  Joseph  had  visions  of  his  future  destinies,  which  were 
strictly  fulfilled — that  the  whole  proceeding  with  regard 
to  him  had  been  under  God's  controlling  influence  from 

»  John  lix.  39. 


PART    I.  BOOKS    OF    MOSES.  57 

beginning  to  end — that  though  his  brethren  "  thought  evil 
against  him,  God  meant  it  unto  good,"  to  bring  to  pass,  as 
he  did  at  a  future  day,  "to  save  much  people  alive."1 


X. 


Nor  is  this  all  with  regard  to  Egypt  wherein  is  seen 
the  image  and  superscription  of  truth.  An  argument  for 
the  Veracity  of  the  New  Testament  has  been  found  in  the 
harmony  which  pervades  the  very  many  incidental  notices 
of  the  condition  of  Judea  at  the  period  when  the  New 
Testament  professes  to  have  been  written.  A  similar 
agreement  without  design  may  be  remarked  in  the  oc- 
casional glimpses  of  Egypt  which  open  upon  us  in  the 
course  of  the  Mosaic  History.  For  instance,  I  perceive  in 
each  and  all  of  the  following  incidents,  indirect  indications 
of  this  one  fact,  that  Egypt  ivas  already  a  great  corn 
country — though  I  do  not  believe  that  such  a  fact  is 
directly  asserted  in  any  passage  in  the  whole  Pentateuch. 
Thus,  when  Abram  found  a  famine  in  the  land  of  Canaan, 
he  "  went  down  into  Egypt  to  sojourn  there."2  There 
was  a  second  famine  in  a  part  of  Canaan  in  the  days  of 
Isaac :  he,  howrever,  on  this  occasion  went  to  Gerar,  which 
was  in  the  country  of  the  Philistines,  but  it  appears  as 
though  this  was  only  to  have  been  a  stage  in  a  journey 
which  he  was  projecting  into  Egypt ;  for  we  read,  that 
"  the  Lord  appeared  unto  him  and  said,  Go  not  down  into 
Egypt;  dwell  in  the  land  which  I  shall  tell  thee  of."3 
There  is  a  third  famine  in  Canaan  in  the  time  of  Jacob, 
and  then  ':  all  countries  came  unto  Egypt  to  buy  corn, 
because  the  famine  was  so  sore  in  all  lands."4     Again,  I 

1  Gen.  1.  20.  2  lb.  xii.  10.  3  lb.  xxvi.  2.  2  lb.  xli.  57. 


58  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART  I. 

read  of  Pharaoh  being  wroth  with  two  of  his  officers — 
they  are  spoken  of  as  persons  of  some  distinction  in  the 
court  of  the  Egyptian  King — and  who  are  they?  One 
was  the  chief  of  the  Butlers,  but  the  other  was  the  chief 
of  the  Bakers.1  Still  I  see  in  this  an  indication  of  Egypt 
being  a  corn  country ;  of  bread  being  there  literally  the 
staff  of  life,  and  the  manufacturing  and  dispensing  of  it 
an  employment  of  considerable  trust  and  consequence. 
So  again  I  find,  that  in  the  fabric  of  the  bricks  in  Egypt 
straw  was  a  very  essential  element ;  and  so  abundant 
does  the  corn-crop  seem  to  have  been — so  widely  was  it 
spread  over  the  face  of  the  country,  that  the  task-masters 
of  the  Israelites  could  exact  the  usual  tale  of  the  bricks, 
though  the  people  had  to  gather  the  stubble  for  themselves 
to  supply  the  place  of  the  straw,  which  was  withheld.2 
Still  I  perceive  in  this  an  intimation  of  the  agricultural 
fertility  of  Egypt, — there  could  not  have  been  the  stubble- 
land  here  implied  unless  corn  had  been  the  staple  crop  of 
the  country.  Then  when  Moses  threatens  to  plague  the 
Egyptians  with  a  Plague  of  Frogs,  what  are  the  places 
which  at  once  present  themselves  as  those  which  are  likely 
to  be  defiled  by  their  presence?  "The  river  shall  bring 
forth  frogs  abundantly,  which  shall  go  up  and  come  into 
thine  house,  and  into  thy  bed-chamber,  and  upon  thy  bed, 
and  into  the  house  of  thy  servants,  and  upon  thy  people, 
and  into  thine  ovens,  and  into  thy  kneading-troughs"* 
And  of  these  kneading-troughs  we  again  read,  as  utensils 
possessed  by  all,  and  without  which  they  could  not  think 
even  of  taking  a  journey — for  on  the  delivery  of  the  Israel- 
ites from  Egypt,  we  find  that  "they  took  their  dough 
before  it  was  leavened,  their  kneading-troughs  being 
bound  up  in  their  clothes  upon  their  shoulders."4 

1  Gen.  xl.  1.  2  Exod.  v.  7.  3  lb.  viii.  3.  *  lb.  xii.  34. 


PART    I.  BOOKS    OF    MOSES.  59 

Now  it  may  be  said,  that  we  all  know  Egypt  to  have 
been  a  great  corn-country — that  the  thing  admits  of  no 
doubt,  and  never  did — I  allow  it  to  be  so — and  if  such  a  fact 
had  been  asserted  in  the  writings  of  Moses  as  a  broad  fact, 
I  should  have  taken  no  notice  of  it,  for  it  would  then  have 
afforded  no  ground  for  an  argument  like  this  ;  in  such  a 
case,  Moses  might  have  come  at  the  knowledge  as  we 
ourselves  may  have  done,  by  having  visited  the  country 
himself,  or  by  having  received  a  report  of  it  from  others 
who  had  visited  it,  and  so  might  have  incorporated  this 
amongst  other  incidents  in  his  history  ;  but  I  do  not  ob- 
serve it  asserted  by  him  in  round  terms;  it  is  not  indeed 
asserted  by  him  at  all — it  is  intimated — intimated  when 
he  is  manifestly  not  thinking  about  it,  when  his  mind  and 
his  pen  are  quite  intent  upon  other  matters ;  intimated  very 
often,  very  indirectly,  in  very  various  ways.  The  fact 
itself  of  Egypt  being  a  great  corn-country  was  no  doubt 
perfectly  well  known  to  Dr.  Johnson,  but  though  so  much 
of  the  scene  of  Rasselas  is  laid  in  Egypt,  I  will  venture  to 
say,  that  there  are  in  it  no  hints  of  the  nature  I  am  de- 
scribing ;  such,  I  mean,  as  would  serve  to  convince  us  that 
the  author  was  relating  a  series  of  events  which  had  hap- 
pened under  his  own  eye,  and  that  the  places  with  which 
he  combines  them  were  not  ideal,  but  those  wherein  they 
actually  came  to  pass. 

Surely  then  it  is  very  satisfactory  to  discover  concur- 
rence thus  uniform,  thus  uncontrived,  in  particulars  falling- 
out  at  intervals  in  the  course  of  an  artless  narrative  which 
is  not  afraid  to  proclaim  the  Almighty  as  manifesting 
himself  by  signal  miracles,  and  which  connects  those  mir- 
acles too  in  the  closest  union  with  the  subordinate  matters 
of  which  we  have  thus  been  able  to  ascertain  the  probable 
truth  and  accuracy. 


60  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    I. 


XI. 


Before  we  dismiss  this  question  of  the  Corn  in  Egypt, 
we  may  remark  another  trifling  instance  or  two  of  con- 
sistency without  design,  declaring  themselves  in  this  part 
of  the  narrative  and  tending  to  strengthen  our  belief  in  it. 
Joseph,  it  seems,1  advised  Pharaoh  before  the  famine 
began,  to  appoint  officers  over  the  land,  that  should  "  take 
up  the  fifth  part  of  the  land  of  Egypt  in  the  seven  plen- 
teous years."  After  this  we  have  several  chapters  occu- 
pied with  the  details  of  the  history  of  Jacob  and  his  sons 
— the  journey  of  the  latter  to  Egypt — their  return  to  their 
father — the  repetition  of  their  journey — the  discovery  of 
Joseph — the  migration  of  the  Patriarch  with  all  his  family 
of  whom  the  individuals  are  named  after  their  respective 
heads — the  introduction  of  Jacob  to  Pharaoh,  and  his  final 
settlement  in  the  land  of  Goshen.  Then  the  affair  of  the 
famine  is  again  touched  upon  in  a  ic\v  verses,  and  a  per- 
manent regulation  of  property  in  Egypt  is  recorded  as  the 
accidental  result  of  that  famine.  For  the  people  who  had 
sold  both  themselves  and  their  lands  to  Pharaoh  for  corn 
to  preserve  life,  are  now  permitted  to  redeem  both  on  the 
payment  of  a  fifth  of  the  produce  to  the  King  forever. 
"  And  Joseph  made  it  a  law  over  the  land  of  Egypt  unto 
this  day,  that  Pharaoh  should  have  the  fifth  part."2  Now 
this  was,  as  we  had  been  told  in  a  former  chapter, 
precisely  the  proportion  which  Joseph  had  "  taken  up" 
before  the  famine  began.  It  was  then  an  arrangement 
entered  into  with  the  proprietors  of  the  soil  prospectively, 
as  likely  to  insure  the  subsistence  of  the  people  ;  the  ex- 
periment was  found  to  answer    and  the  opportunity  of 

•  Gen.  xli.  34.  2  lb.  xlvii  26. 


PART    I.  BOOKS    OF    MOSES.  61 

perpetuating  it  having  occurred,  the  arrangement  was  now 
made  lasting  and  compulsory.  Magazines  of  corn  were 
henceforth  to  be  established  which  should  at  all  times  be 
ready  to  meet  an  accidental  failure  of  the  harvest.  Can 
anything  be  more  natural  than  this?  anything  more 
common  than  for  great  civil  and  political  changes  to 
spring  out  of  provisions  which  chanced  to  be  made  to  meet 
some  temporary  emergency  ?  Has  not  our  own  constitu- 
tion, and  have  not  the  constitutions  of  most  other  countries, 
ancient  and  modern,  grown  out  of  occasion — out  of  the 
impulse  of  the  day  ? 

Further  still.  Though  Joseph  possessed  himself  on  his 
royal  master's  account  of  all  the  land  of  Egypt  besides, 
and  disposed  of  the  people  throughout  the  country  just  as 
he  pleased,'  " he  did  not  buy  the  land  of  the  priests,  for 
the  priests  had  a  portion  assigned  them  of  Pharaoh,  and 
did  eat  their  portion  which  Pharaoh  gave  them,  wherefore 
they  sold  not  their  lands."  The  priests  then,  we  see, 
were  greatly  favored  in  the  arrangements  made  at  this 
period  of  national  distress.  Now  does  not  this  accord  with 
what  we  had  been  told  on  a  former  occasion. — that  Pha- 
raoh being  desirous  to  do  Joseph  honor,  causing  him  to 
ride  in  the  second  chariot  that  he  had,  and  crying  before 
him,  Bow  the  knee,  and  making  him  ruler  over  all  the 
land  of  Egypt,2  added  yet  this  as  the  final  proof  of  his 
high  regard,  that  "  he  gave  him  to  wife  Asenath,  the 
daughter  of  Potipherah,  Priest  of  On?"3  When  therefore 
the  priests  were  thus  held  in  esteem  by  Pharaoh,  and 
when  the  minister  of  Pharaoh,  under  whose  immediate 
directions  all  the  regulations  of  the  polity  of  Egypt  were 
at  that  time  conducted,  had  the  daughter  of  one  of  them 
for  his  wife,  is  it  not  the  most  natural  thing  in  the  world 
to  have  happened,  that  their  lands  should  be  spared  ? 

»  Gen.  xlvii.  22.  2  lb.  xli.  43.  »  lb.  xli.  45. 

6 


62  THE    VERACITY   OF    THE  PART    I. 


XII. 

I  have  already  found  an  argument  for  the  veracity  of 
Moses  in  the  identity  of  Jacob's  character  :  I  now  find  an- 
other in  the  identity  of  that  of  Joseph.  There  is  one  quality 
(as  it  has  been  often  observed,  though  with  a  different  view 
from  mine),  which  runs  like  a  thread  through  his  whole 
history,  his  affection  for  his  father.  Israel  loved  him, 
we  read,  more  than  all  his  children — he  was  the  child  of 
his  age — his  mother  died  whilst  he  was  yet  young,  and  a 
double  care  of  him  consequently  devolved  upon  his  survi- 
ving parent.  He  made  him  a  coat  of  many  colors — he 
kept  him  at  home  when  his  other  sons  were  sent  to  feed 
the  flocks.  When  the  bloody  garment  was  brought  in, 
Jacob  in  his  affection  for  him,  (that  same  affection  which 
on  a  subsequent  occasion,  when  it  was  told  him  that  after 
all  Joseph  was  alive,  made  him  as  slow  to  believe  the 
good  tidings  as  he  was  now  quick  to  apprehend  the  sad,) 
in  this  his  affection  for  him,  I  s&y,  Jacob  at  once  concluded 
the  worst ;  and  "  he  rent  his  clothes  and  put  sackcloth 
upon  his  loins,  and  mourned  for  his  son  many  days,  and 
all  his  daughters  rose  up  to  comfort  him  ;  but  he  refused 
to  be  comforted,  and  he  said,  For  I  will  go  down  into  the 
grave  of  my  son  mourning." 

Now  what  were  the  feelings  in  Joseph  which  responded 
to  these  ?  When  the  sons  of  Jacob  went  down  to  Egypt, 
and  Joseph  knew  them  though  they  knew  not  him,  for 
they  (it  may  be  remarked,  and  this  again  is  not  like  fic- 
tion), were  of  an  age  not  to  be  greatly  changed  by  the 
lapse  of  years,  and  were  still  sustaining  the  character  in 
which  Joseph  had  always  seen  them,  whilst  he  himself 
had  meanwhile  grown  out  of  the  stripling  into  the  man, 
and  from  a  shepherd-boy  was  become  the  ruler  of  a  king- 


PART   I.  BOOKS    OF    MOSES.  63 

dom — when  his  brethren  thus  came  before  him,  his  ques- 
tion was,  "  Is  your  father  yet  alive  ?'"  They  went  down 
a  second  time,  and  again  the  question  was,  "  Is  your  fa- 
ther well,  the  old  man  of  whom  ye  spake,  is  he  yet  alive  ?" 
More  he  could  not  venture  to  ask,  whilst  he  was  yet  in 
his  disguise.  By  a  stratagem  he  now  detains  Benjamin, 
leaving  the  others,  if  they  would,  to  go  their  way.  But 
Judah  came  near  unto  him,  and  entreated  him  for  his 
brother,  telling  him  how  that  he  had  been  "  surety  to  his 
father'"  to  bring  him  back,  how  that  "  his  father  was  an 
old  man,"  and  that  this  was  the  "  child  of  his  old  age,  and 
that  he  loved  him," — how  it  would  come  to  pass  Uiat  if  he 
should  not  see  the  lad  with  him  he  would  die,  and  Ttis- 
gray  hairs  be  brought  with  sorrow  to  the  grave  ;  for  "  how 
shall  I  go  to  my  father,  and  the  lad  be  not  with  me  ? — 
lest,  peradventure,  I  see  the  evil  that  shall  come  on  my  fa- 
ther." Here,  without  knowing  it,  he  had  struck  the  string 
that  was  the  tenderest  of  all.  Joseph's  firmness  forsook 
him  at  this  repeated  mention  of  his  father,  and  in  terms 
so  touching — he  could  not  refrain  himself  any  longer,  and 
causing  every  man  to  go  out,  he  made  himself  known  to 
his  brethren.  Then,  even  in  the  paroxysm  which  came 
on  him,  (for  he  wept  aloud  so  that  the  Egyptians  heard,) 
still  his  first  words  uttered  from  the  fulness  of  his  heart 
were,  "  Doth  my  father  yet  live  ?"  He  now  bids  them 
hasten  and  bring  the  old  man  down,  bearing  to  him  tokens 
of  his  love  and  tidings  of  his  glory.  He  goes  to  meet  him 
— he  presents  himself  unto  him,  and  falls  on  his  neck  and 
weeps  on  his  neck  a  good  while — he  provides  for  him  and 
his  household  out  of  the  fat  of  the  land — he  sets  him 
before  Pharaoh.  By  and  by  he  hears  that  he  is  sick,  and 
hastens  to  visit  him—he  receives  his  blessing — watches 

1  Gen.  xliii.  7. 


64  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    I. 

his  death-bed — embalms  his  body — mourns  for  him  three- 
score and  ten  days — and  then  carries  him  (as  he  had  de- 
sired), into  Canaan  to  bury  him,  taking  with  him  as  an 
escort  to  do  him  honor,  "  all  the  elders  of  Egypt,  and 
all  the  servants  of  Pharaoh,  and  all  his  house,  and  the 
house  of  h;s  brethren,  chariots  and  horsemen,  a  very 
great  company."  How  natural  it  was  now  for  his  breth- 
ren to  think  that  the  tie  by  which  alone  they  could 
imagine  Joseph  to  be  held  to  them  was  dissolved,  that 
any  respect  he  might  have  felt  or  feigned  for  them, 
must  have  been  buried  in  the  Cave  of  Machpelah,  and 
that  he  would  now  requite  to  them  the  evil  they  had 
done !  "  And  they  sent  a  message  unto  Joseph,  saying, 
Thy  father  did  command  before  he  died,  saying,  So  shall 
ye  say  unto  Joseph,  Forgive,  I  pray  thee  now,  the  tres- 
pass of  thy  brethren  and  their  sin, — for  they  did  unto  thee 
evil."  And  then  they  add  of  themselves,  as  if  well  aware 
of  the  surest  road  to  their  brother's  heart,  "  Forgive,  we 
pray  thee,  the  trespass  of  the  servants  of  the  God  of  thy 
father"  In  everything  the  father's  name  is  still  put  fore- 
most :  it  is  his  memory  which  they  count  upon  as  their 
shield  and  buckler.  Moreover,  it  may  be  added,  that 
though  all  intercourse  had  ceased  for  so  many  years  be- 
tween Joseph  and  his  famihy,  still  the  lasting  affection  he 
bore  a  parent  is  manifested  in  the  name  which  he  gave  to 
his  son  born  to  him  only  two  years  before  the  famine,  even 
Manasseh,  or  forgetting,  for  God,  said  he,  "  hath  made 
me  forget  all  my  hire  and  all  my  father's  house  ;'n  as 
though  '  instead  of  his  father  he  must  have  children'  to 
fill  up  the  void  in  his  heart  which  a  parent's  loss  had 
created. 

It  is  not  the  singular  beauty  of  these  scenes,  or  the 

i  Gen.  xli.  51 


PART    I.  BOOKS    OF    MOSES.  65 

moral  lesson  they  teach,  excellent  as  it  is,  with  which  I 
am  now  concerned,  but  simply  the  perfect  artless  consist- 
ency  which  prevails  through  them  all.  It  is  not  the  con- 
stancy with  which  the  son's  strong  affection  for  his  father 
had  lived  through  an  interval  of  twenty  years'  absence, 
and  what  is  more,  through  the  temptation  of  sudden  pro- 
motion to  the  highest  estate — it  is  not  the  noble-minded 
frankness  with  which  he  still  acknowledges  his  kindred, 
and  makes  a  wray  for  them,  "  shepherds"  as  they  were,  to 
the  throne  of  Pharaoh  himself — it  is  not  the  simplicity  and 
singleness  of  heart,  which  allow  him  to  give  all  the  first- 
born of  Egypt,  men  over  whom  he  bore  absolute  rule,  an 
opportunity  of  observing  his  own  comparatively  humble 
origin,  by  leading  them  in  attendance  upon  his  father's 
corpse,  to  the  valleys  of  Canaan  and  the  modest  cradle  of 
his  race — it  is  not,  in  a  word,  the  grace,  but  the  identity 
of  Joseph's  character,  the  light  in  which  it  is  exhibited  by 
himself,  and  the  light  in  which  it  is  regarded  by  his  breth- 
ren, to  which  I  now  point  as  stamping  it  with  marks  of 
reality  not  to  be  gainsaid. 


XIII. 

I  will  now  follow  the  Israelites  out  of  Egypt  into  the 
wilderness,  on  their  return  to  the  land  from  which  their 
fathers  had  wandered,  and  w7hich  they,  or  at  least  their 
children,  were  destined  to  enjoy. 

In  the  tenth  chapter  of  Leviticus  we  are  told  that  "  Na- 
dab  and  Abihu,  the  sons  of  Aaron,  took  either  of  them  his 
censer  and  put  fire  therein,  and  put  incense  thereon,  and 
offered  strange  fire  unto  the  Lord,  which  he  commanded 
them  not.  And  there  went  out  fire  from  the  Lord  and  de- 
voured them,  and  they  died  before  the  Lord."     Now  it  is 


66  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    I. 

natural  to  ask,  how  came  Nadab  and  Abihu  to  be  guilty 
of  this  careless  affront  to  God,  lighting  their  censers  proba- 
bly from  their  own  hearths,  and  not  from  the  hallowed  fire 
of  the  altar,  as  they  were  commanded  to  do.  Possibly  we 
cannot  guess  how  it  happened — it  may  be  one  of  those 
many  matters  which  are  of  no  particular  importance  to  be 
known,  and  concerning  which  we  are  accordingly  left  in 
the  dark.  Yet  when  I  read  shortly  afterwards  the  follow- 
ing instructions  given  to  Aaron,  I  am  led  to  suspect  that 
they  had  their  origin  in  some  recent  abuse  which  called 
for  them,  though  no  such  origin  is  expressly  assigned  to 
them.  I  cannot  help  imagining,  that  the  offence  of  Nadab 
and  Abihu  was  at  the  bottom  of  the  statute,  "  Do  not  drink 
vrine  nor  strong  drink,  thou  nor  thy  sons  with  thee,  when 
ye  go  into  the  Tabernacle  of  the  congregation,  lest  ye  die 
— it  shall  be  a  statute  forever  throughout  your  generations  : 
and  that  ye  may  put  difference  between  holy  and  unholy, 
and  between  clean  and  unclean,  and  that  ye  may  teach 
the  children  of  Israel  all  the  statutes  which  the  Lord  hath 
spoken  unto  them  by  the  hands  of  Moses."  Thus  far  at 
least  is  clear,  that  a  grievous  and  thoughtless  insult  is  of- 
fered to  God  by  two  of  his  Priests,  for  which  they  are  cut 
off— that  without  any  direct  allusion  to  their  case,  but  still 
very  shortly  after  it  had  happened,  a  law  is  issued  forbid- 
ding the  Priests  the  use  of  wine  when  about  to  minister. 
I  conclude,  therefore,  that  there  was  a  relation  (though  it 
is  not  asserted)  between  the  specific  offence  and  the  gen- 
eral law  ;  the  more  so,  because  the  sin  against  which  that 
law  is  directed  is  just  of  a  kind  to  have  produced  the  rash 
and  inconsiderate  act  of  which  Aaron's  sons  were  guilty. 
If,  therefore,  this  incidental  mention  of  such  a  law  at  such 
a  moment,  a  moment  so  likely  to  suggest  the  enactment 
of  it,  be  thought  enough  to  establish  the  law  as  a  matter 
of  fact,  then  have  we  once  more  ground  to  stand  upon  ; 


PART  I.  BOOKS    OP    MOSES.  67 

for  the  enactment  of  the  law  is  coupled  with  the  sin  of 
Aaron's  sons  ;  their  sin  with  their  punishment ;  their  pun- 
ishment with  a  miracle.  Nor,  it  may  be  added,  does  the 
unreserved  and  faithful  record  of  such  a  death,  suffered  for 
such  an  offence,  afford  an  inconsiderable  argument  in  favor 
of  the  candor  and  honesty  of  Moses,  who  is  no  respecter 
of  persons  it  seems  ;  but  when  God's  glory  is  concerned, 
and  the  welfare  of  the  people  intrusted  to  him,  does  not 
scruple  to  be  the  chronicler  of  the  disgrace  and  destruction 
even  of  the  children  of  his  own  brother. 


XIV. 

Another  coincidence  suggests  itself,  arising  out  of 
this  same  portion  of  history,  whether  however  founded  in 
fact  or  in  fancy,  be  my  readers  the  judges.  From  the  9th 
chapter  of  Numbers,  v.  15,  we  learn  that  the  Tabernacle 
was  erected  in  the  wilderness  preparatory  to  the  celebra- 
tion of  the  first  Passover  kept  by  the  Israelites  after  their 
escape  from  Egypt.  From  the  40th  chapter  of  Exodus 
we  find,  that  it  was  reared  on  the  first  day  of  the  first 
month,  (v.  2,)  or  thirteen  days  before  the  Passover,1  and 
that  at  the  same  time  Aaron  and  his  sons  were  consecrated 
to  minister  in  it  (v.  13.)  In  the  8th  and  9th  chapters  of 
Liviticus  are  given  the  particulars  of  their  consecration, 
(8(h,  6,  12,  30,)  and  the  ceremony  is  said  to  have  occupied 
seven  days,  (v.  33,)  during  which  they  were  not  to  leave 
the  Tabernacle  day  or  night.  On  the  eighth  day  they  of- 
fered up  sin-offerings  for  themselves  and  for  the  people.  It 
was  on  this  same  day,  as  we  read  in  the  tenth  chapter,2 
that  Nadab  and  Abihu  were  cut  off  because  of  the  strange 

1  Lev.  xxiii.  5.  2  See  ch.  ix.  a,  12;  x.  19. 


68  THE    VERACITY    OF   THE  PART    I. 

fire  which  the)^  offered,  and  their  dead  bodies  were  dis- 
posed of  as  follows: — "Moses  called  Mishael  and  Eliza- 
phan  the  sons  of  Uzziel,  the  uncle  of  Aaron,  and  said  unto 
them,  Come  near,  carry  your  brethren  from  before  the 
sanctuary  out  of  the  camp.  So  they  went  near,  and  car- 
ried them  in  their  coats  out  of  the  camp."  (x.  4.)  All  this 
happened  on  the  eighth  day  of  the  first  month,  or  just  six 
days  before  the  Passover. 

Now  in  the  9th  chapter  of  the  Book  of  Numbers,  which 
speaks  of  this  identical  Passover,  (v.  1,)  as  will  be  seen 
by  a  reference  to  the  first  verse  of  that  chapter,  (indeed 
there  is  no  mention  of  more  than  this  one  Passover  having 
been  kept  in  the  whole  march,1)  in  this  9th  chapter  I  am 
told  of  the  following  incidental  difficulty ; — that  "  there 
were  certain  men  who  were  defiled  by  the  dead  body  of 
a  man,  that  they  could  not  keep  the  Passover  on  that  day 
— and  they  came  before  Moses  and  before  Aaron  on  that 
day — and  those  men  said  unto  him,  We  are  defiled  by  the 
dead  body  of  a  man.  wherefore  we  are  kept  back  that  we 
may  not  offer  an  offering  to  the  Lord  in  his  appointed  sea- 
son among  the  children  of  Israel."  (v.  6,  7.)  The  case  is 
spoken  of  as  a  solitary  one. 

Now  it  may  be  observed,  by  way  of  limiting  the  ques- 
tion, that  the  number  of  Israelites  who  paid  a  tax  to  the 
Tabernacle  a  short  time,  and  only  a  short  time,  before  its 
erection,  were  603,550,  being  all  the  males  above  twenty 
years  of  age,  the  Levites  excepted2 — at  least  this  exception 
is  all  but  certain,  that  tribe  being  the  tellers,  being  already 
consecrated,  and  set  apart  from  the  other  tribes,  and  it  not 
being  usual  to  take  the  sum  of  them  among  the  children 
of  Israel.3  Moreover,  the  number  is  likely,  in  this  instance, 
to  be  correct,  because  it  (allies  with  the  number  of  talents 

1  See  also  Josh.  v.  9,  10.  «  Exod.  xxxviii.  26. 

8  See  Numb.  i.  47,  49,  and  xxvi.  62. 


PART    I.  BOOKS    OF    MOSES.  69 

to  which  the  poll-tax  amounted  at  half  a  shekel  a  head. 
But  shortly  after  the  Tabernacle  had  been  set  up,  (for  it 
was  at  the  beginning  of  the  second  month  of  the  second 
year.)  the  number  of  the  people  was  again  taken  accord- 
ing to  the  families  and  tribes,1  and  still  it  is  just  the  same 
as  before,  003,550  men.  In  this  short  interval,  therefore, 
(which  is  that  in  which  we  are  now  interested,)  it  should 
seem,  that  no  man  had  died  of  the  males  who  were  above 
twenty,  not  being  Levites — for  of  these  no  account  seems 
to  have  been  taken  in  either  census — indeed  in  the  latter 
census  they  are  expressly  excepted.  The  dead  body, 
therefore,  by  which  these  "certain  men"  were  defiled, 
could  not  have  belonged  to  this  large  class  of  the  Israel- 
ites. But  of  a  case  of  death,  and  of  defilement  in  conse- 
quence, which  had  happened  only  six  days  before  the 
Passover,  amongst  the  Levites,  we  had  been  told  (as  we 
have  seen)  in  the  9th  chapter  of  Leviticus.  My  con- 
clusion, therefore,  is,  that  these  "  certain  men,"  who  were 
defiled,  were  no  others  than  Mishael  and  Elizaphan,  who 
had  carried  out  the  dead  bodies  of  Nadab  and  Abihu. 
Neither  can  anything  be  more  likely  than  that,  with  the 
lively  impression  on  their  minds  of  God's  wrath  so  recently 
testified  against  those  who  should  presume  to  approach  him 
unhallowed,  they  should  refer  their  case  to  Moses,  and  run 
no  risk. 

I  state  the  conclusion  and  the  grounds  of  it.  To  those 
who  require  stronger  proof,  I  can  only  say,  I  have  none  to 
give  ;  but  if  the  coincidence  be  thought  well  founded,  then 
surely  a  more  striking  example  of  consistency  without  de- 
sign cannot  be  well  conceived.  Indeed,  after  it  had  been 
suggested  to  me  by  a  hint  to  this  effect,  thrown  out  by  Dr. 
Shuckford,  unaccompanied  by  any  exposition  of  the  argu- 

1  Numb.  i.  46. 


70 


THE    VERACITY    OF   THE  PART    I. 


ments  which  might  be  urged  in  support  of  it,  I  had  put  it 
aside  as  one  of  those  gratuitous  conjectures  in  which  that 
learned  Author  may  perhaps  be  thought  sometimes  to  in- 
dulge— till  by  searching  more  accurately  through  several  de- 
tached parts  of  several  detached  chapters  in  Exodus.  Levit- 
icus, and  Numbers,  I  was  able  to  collect  the  evidence  I  have 
produced,  whether  satisfactory  or  not — be  my  readers,  as  I 
have  said,  the  judges.  For  myself,  I  confess,  that  though 
it  is  not  demonstrative,  it  is  very  persuasive. 


XV 

"  All  the  congregation  of  the  children  of  Israel,"  we 
read,1  "journeyed  from  the  wilderness  of  Sin,  after  their 
journeys  according  to  the  commandment  of  the  Lord,  and 
pitched  in  Repkidim,  and  there  was  no  water  for  the  peo- 
ple to  drink? — "And  the  people  thirsted  there  for  water  ; 
and  the  people  murmured  against  Moses,  and  said,  Where- 
fore is  this,  that  thou  hast  brought  us  up  out  of  Egypt  to 
kill  us  and  our  children  and  our  cattle  with  thirst  ?"  (v.  3.) 
Moses  upon  this  entreats  the  Lord  for  Israel ;  and  the  nar- 
rative proceeds  in  the  words  of  the  Almighty — "Behold,  I 
will  stand  before  thee  there  upon  the  rock  in  Horeb,  and 
thou  shalt  smite  the  rock,  and  there  shall  come  water  out  of 
it,  that  my  people  may  drink.  And  Moses  did  so  in  the  sight 
of  the  elders  of  Israel.  And  he  called  the  name  of  the 
place  Massah,  and  Meribah,  because  of  the  chiding  of  the 
children  of  Israel,  and  because  they  tempted  the  Lord,  say- 
ing, Is  the  Lord  among  us,  or  not  V  "  Then  came  Ama- 
Ze/r,"  the  narrative  continues,  "  and  fought  with  Israel  in 
Rephxdim? 

1  Exod.  xvii.  1. 


PART    I.  BOOKS    OP    MOSES.  71 

Now  this  last  incident  is  mentioned,  as  must  be  perceived 
at  once,  without  any  other  reference  to  what  had  gone  be- 
fore than  a  reference  of  date.     It  was  "  then"  that  Amalek 
came.     It  is  the  beginning  of  another  adventure  which 
befell  the  Israelites,  and  which  Moses  now  goes  on  to  relate. 
Accordingly  in  many  copies  of  our  English  version  a  mark 
is  here  introduced  indicating  the  commencement  of  a  fresh 
paragraph.     Yet  I  cannot  but  suspect,  that  there  is  a  coin- 
cidence in  this  case  between  the  production  of  the  water, 
in  an  arid  wilderness,  and  the  attack  of  the  Amalekites— 
that  though  no  hint  whatever  to  this  effect  is  dropped, 
there  is  nevertheless  the  relation  between  them  of  cause 
and  consequence.     For  what  in   those  times  and  those 
countries  was  so  common  a  bone  of  contention  as  the  pos- 
session of  a  well  ?     Thus  we  read  of  Abraham  reproving 
Abimelech  "  because  of  a  well  of  water,  which  Abime- 
lech's  servants  had  violently  taken  away."1     And  again 
we  are  told,  that  "  Isaac's  servants  digged  in  a  valley  and 
found  there  a  well  of  springing  water— and  the  herds- 
men  of  Gerar  did  strive  with  Isaac's  herdsmen,  saying, 
The  water  is  ours,  and  he  called  the  name  of  the  well 
Esek,  because  they  strove  with  him.     And  they  digged 
another  well,  and  strove  for  that  also ;  and  he  called"  the 
name  of  it  Sitnah.     And  he  removed  from  thence,  and 
digged  another  well,  and  for  that  they  strove  not ;  and  he 
called  the  name  of  it  Rehoboth  ;  and  he  said,  For  now  the 
Lord  hath  made  room  for  us,  and  we  shall  be  fruitful  in 
the  land."2    In  like  manner  when  the  daughters  of  the 
Priest  of  Midian  "  came  and  drew  water,  and  filled  the 
troughs  to  water  their  father's  flock,  the  shepherds,"  we 
find,  "  came  and  drove  them  away:  but  Moses  stood  up 
and  helped  them,  and  watered  their  flock."3     And  a^ain, 

\  Gen  xii.  25.  2  rb.  xxn.  22.  3  Exod.  ii.  17. 


72  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    I. 

when  Moses  sent  messengers  to  the  King  of  Edom  with 
proposals  that  he  might  be  permitted  to  lead  the  people  of 
Israel  through  his  territory,  the  subject  of  water  enters  very 
largely  into  the  terms  :  "  Let  me  pass,  I  pray  thee,  through 
thy  country :  we  will  not  pass  through  the  fields  and 
through  the  vineyards,  neither  will  we  drink  of  the  water 
of  the  tcclls :  we  will  go  by  the  king's  highway — we  will 
not  turn  to  the  right  hand  nor  to  the  left,  until  we  have 
passed  thy  borders.  And  Edom  said  unto  him,  Thou  shalt 
not  pass  by  me  lest  I  come  out  against  thee  with  the  sword. 
And  the  children  of  Israel  said  unto  him,  We  will  go  by  the 
highway  :  and  if  I  and  my  cattle  drink  of  thy  water,  then 
I  will  pay  for  it."1  Again,  on  a  subsequent  occasion,  Moses 
sent  messengers  to  Sihon,  king  of  the  Amorites,  with  the 
same  stipulations : — "  Let  me  pass  through  thy  land  :  we 
will  not  turn  into  the  fields  or  into  the  vineyards  ;  we  will 
not  drink  of  the  waters  of  the  well,  but  we  will  go  along 
by  the  king's  highway,  until  we  be  past  thy  borders."2 
And  when  Moses  in  the  Book  of  Deuteronomy  recapitulates 
some  of  the  Lord's  commands,  one  of  them  is.  as  touching 
the  children  of  Esau,  "  Meddle  not  with  them  ;  for  I  will 
not  give  you  their  land,  no,  not  so  much  as  a  foot  breadth, 
because  I  have  given  Mount  Seir  unto  Esau  for  a  possession. 
Ye  shall  buy  meat  of  them  for  money  that  ye  may  eat.  and 
ye  shall  also  buy  water  of  them  for  money  that  ye  may 
drink."3  Indeed  the  well  is  quite  a  feature  in  the  narra- 
tive of  Moses,  brief  as  that  narrative  is.  It  unobtrusively 
but  constantly  reminds  us  of  our  scene  lying  ever  in  the 
East — just  as  the  Forum  could  not  fail  to  be  perpetually 
mixing  itself  up  with  the  details  of  any  history  of  Rome 
which  was  not  spurious.  The  well  is  the  spring  of  life. 
It  is  the  place  of  meeting  for  the  citizens  in  the  cool  of  the 

>  Numb.  ix.  17.  2  lb.  iii.  22.  »  Dent.  ii.  6. 


PART    I.  BOOKS    OF    MOSES. 


73 


day— the  place  of  resort  for  the  shepherds  and  herdsmen 

it  is  here  that  we  may  witness  the  acts  of  courtesy  or  of 

stratagem — acts  of  religion — acts  of  civil  compact— acts 
commemorative  of  things  past— it  is  here  that  the  journey 
ends— it  is  by  this  that  the  next  is  regulated— hither  the 
fugitive  and  the  outcast  repair— here  the  weary  pilgrim 
rests  himself— the  lack  of  it  is  the  curse  of  a  kingdom, 
and  the  prospect  of  it  in  abundance  the  blessing  which 
helps  forward  the  steps  of  the  stranger  when  he  seeks 
another  country.  It  enters  as  an  element  into  the  lan- 
guage itself  of  Holy  Writ,  and  the  simile,  the  illustration, 
the  metaphor,  are  still  telling  forth  the  great  Eastern 
apophthegm,  that  of  "  all  things  water  is  the  fust."  Of 
such  value  was  the  well — so  fruitful  a  source  of  contention 
in  those  parched  and  thirsty  lands  was  the  possession  of  a 

well ! 

Now  applying  these  passages  to  the  question  before  us, 
I  think  it  will  be  seen,  that  the  sudden  gushing  of  the 
water  from  the  rock,  (which  was  the  sudden  discovery  of 
an  invaluable  treasure,)  and  the  subsequent  onset  of  the 
Amalekites  at  the  very  same  place— for  both  occurrences 
are  said  to  have  happened  at  Repkidim,  though  given  as 
perfectly  distinct  and  independent  matters,  do  coincide  very 
remarkably  with  one  another;  and  yet  so  undesigned  is 
the  coincidence,  (if  indeed  coincidence  it  is  after  all,)  that 
it  might  not  suggest  itself  even  to  readers  of  the  Pen- 
tateuch whose  lot  is  cast  in  a  torrid  clime,  and  to  whom 
the  value  of  a  draught  of  cold  water  is  therefore  well 
known  :  still  less  to  those  who  live  in  a  land  of  brooks,  like 
our  own,  a  land  of  fountains  and  depths  that  spring  out  of 
the  valleys  and  hills,  and  who  may  drink  of  them  freely 
without  cost  and  without  quarrel. 

If  then  it  be  admitted,  that  the  issue  of  the  torrent  from 
the  rock  synchronizes  very  singularly  with  the  aggression 

7 


74  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    I. 

of  Amalek,  yet  that  the  narrative  of  the  two  events  does 
not  hint  at  any  connection  whatever  between  them,  I 
think  that  all  suspicion  of  contrivance  is  laid  to  sleep,  and 
that  whatever  force  is  due  to  the  argument  of  consistency 
without  contrivance  as  a  test,  and  as  a  testimony  of  truth, 
obtains  here.  Yet  here,  as  in  so  many  other  instances 
already  adduced,  the  stamp  of  truth,  such  as  it  is,  is  found 
where  a  miracle  is  intimately  concerned  ;  for  if  the  coinci- 
dence in  question  be  thought  enough  to  satisfy  us  that 
Moses  was  relating  an  indisputable  matter  of  fact,  when 
he  said  that  the  Israelites  received  a  supply  of  water  at 
Rephidim,  it  adds  to  our  confidence  that  he  is  relating  an 
indisputable  matter  of  fact  too,  when  he  says  in  the  same 
breath,  that  it  was  a  miraculous  supply — where  we  can 
prove  that  there  is  truth  in  a  story  so  far  as  a  scrutiny  of 
our  own,  which  wras  not  contemplated  by  the  party  whose 
words  we  are  trying,  enables  us  to  go,  it  is  only  fair  to 
infer,  in  the  absence  of  all  testimony  to  the  contrary,  that 
there  is  truth  also  in  such  parts  of  the  same  story  as  our 
scrutiny  cannot  attain  unto.  And  indeed  it  seems  to  me, 
that  the  sin  of  Amalek  on  this  occasion,  a  sin  which  was 
so  offensive  in  God's  sight  as  to  be  treasured  up  in  judg- 
ment against  that  race,  causing  Him  eventually  to  destroy 
them  utterly,  derived  its  heinousness  from  this  very  thing, 
that  the  Amalekites  were  here  endeavoring  to  dispossess 
the  Israelites  of  a  vital  blessing  which  God  had  sent  to 
them  by  miracle,  and  which  he  could  not  so  send  without 
making  it  manifest  even  to  the  Amalekites  themselves, 
that  the  children  of  Israel  were  under  his  special  care — 
that  in  fighting  therefore  against  Israel,  they  were  fighting 
against  God.  And  such,  I  persuade  myself,  is  the  true 
force  of  an  expression  in  Deuteronomy  used  in  reference 
to  this  very  incident — for  Amalek  is  there  said  to  "  have 
smitten  them  when  they  were  weary,  and  to  have  feared 


PART    I.  BOOKS    OI<     MOSES.  75 

not  God  fl  that  is,  to  have  done  it  in  defiance  of  a  mira- 
cle, which  ought  to  have  impressed  them  with  a  fear  of 
God,  indicating,  as  of  course  it  did,  that  God  willed  not 
the  destruction  of  this  people. 


XVI 

Amongst  the  institutions  established  or  confirmed  by 
the  Almighty  whilst  the  Israelites  were  on  their  inarch, 
for  their  observance  when  they  should  have  taken  posses- 
sion of  the  land  of  Canaan,  this  was  one — "  Three  times 
thou  shalt  keep  a  feast  unto  me  in  the  year.  Thou  shalt 
keep  the  Feast  of  Unleavened  bread — thou  shalt  eat  un- 
leavened bread  seven  days,  as  I  commanded  thee,  in  the 
time  appointed  of  the  month  Abib ;  for  in  it  thou  earnest 
out  from  Egypt ;  and  none  shall  appear  before  me  empty  : 
— and  the  Feast  of  Harvest,  the  first-fruits  of  thy  labors, 
which  thou  hast  sown  in  thy  field : — and  the  feast  of  In- 
gathering, which  is  in  the  end  of  the  year,  when  thou 
hast  gathered  in  thy  labors  out  of  the  field."2 

Such  then  were  the  three  great  annual  feasts.  The 
first,  in  the  month  Abib,  which  was  the  Passover.  The 
second,  which  was  the  Feast  of  Weeks.  The  third,  the 
Feast  of  In-gathering,  when  all  the  fruits,  wine  and  oil,  as 
well  as  corn,  had  been  collected  and  laid  up.  The  season 
of  the  year  at  which  the  first  of  these  occurred  is  all  that 
I  am  anxious  to  settle,  as  bearing  upon  a  coincidence 
which  I  shall  mention  by  and  by.  Now  this  is  deter- 
mined with  sufficient  accuracy  for  my  purpose,  by  the 
second  of  the  three  being  the  Feast  of  Harvest,  and  the 
fact  that  the  interval  between  the  first  and  second  was 

i  Deut.  xxv.  18.  2  Exod.  xxiii.  14. 


76  THE    VERACITY    OF   THE  PART    I. 

just  seven  weeks  :l  u  And  ye  shall  count  unto  you  from 
the  morrow  after  the  Sabbath,"  (this  was  the  Sabbath  of 
the  Passover,)  "  from  the  day  that  ye  brought  the  sheaf 
of  the  wave-offering ;  seven  Sabbaths  shall  be  complete. 
Even  unto  the  morrow  after  the  seventh  Sabbath  shall  ye 
number  fifty  days,  and  ye  shall  offer  a  new  meat-offering 
unto  the  Lord.  Ye  shall  bring  out  of  your  habitations 
two  wa.ve-loaves,  of  two  tenth-deals,  they  shall  be  of  fine 
flour,  they  shall  be  baken  with  leaven.  They  are  the 
first-fruits  unto  the  Lord." 

At  the  Feast  of  Weeks,  therefore,  the  corn  was  ripe  and 
just  gathered,  for  then  were  the  first-fruits  to  be  offered,  in 
the  loaves  made  out  of  the  new  corn.  If  then  the  wheat 
was  in  this  state  at  the  second  great  festival,  it  must  have 
been  very  far  from  ripe  at  the  Passover,  which  was  seven 
weeks  earlier ;  and  the  wave-sheaf,  which,  as  we  have 
seen,  was  to  be  offered  at  the  Passover,  must  have  been 
of  some  grain  which  came  in  before  wheat — it  was  in  fact 
barley.2  Now  does  not  this  agree  in  a  remarkable,  but 
most  incidental  manner,  with  a  circumstance  mentioned 
in  the  description  of  the  Plague  of  the  Hail  ?  The  hail,  it 
is  true,  was  sent  some  little  time  previous  to  the  destruc- 
tion of  the  first-born,  or  the  date  of  the  Passover,  for  the 
Plague  of  Locusts  and  the  Plague  of  Darkness  intervened, 
but  it  was  evidently  only  a  little  time  ;  for  Moses  being 
eighty  years  old  when  he  went  before  Pharaoh,3  and  hav- 
ing walked  forty  years  in  the  wilderness,4  and  being  only 
a  hundred  and  twenty  years  old  when  he  died,5  it  is  plain 
that  he  could  have  lost  very  little  time  by  the  delay  of  the 
plagues  in  Egypt,  the  period  of  his  life  being  filled  up 
without  any  allowance  for  such  delay.  I  mention  this, 
because  it  will  be  seen  that  the  argument  requires  the 

l  Lev.  xxiii.  15.  2  See  Ruth  ii.  23.  3  Exod.  vii.  7. 

«  Joshua  v.  6.  5  Deut.  xxxiv.  7. 


PART    I.  BOOKS    OF    MOSES.  77 

time  of  the  hail  and  that  of  the  death  of  the  first-born  (or 
in  other  words  the  Passover)  to  be  nearly  the  same.  Now 
the  state  of  the  crops  in  Egypt  at  the  period  of  the  hail 
we  happen  to  know — was  it  then  such  as  we  might  have 
reason  to  expect  from  the  state  of  the  crops  of  Judea  at  or 
near  the  same  season  ? — i.  e.  the  barley  ripe,  the  wheat 
not  ripe  by  several  weeks  ? 

It  is  fortunate;  inasmuch  as  it  involves  a  point  of  evi- 
dence, that  one  of  the  Plagues  chanced  to  be  that  of  Hail 
— for  it  is  the  only  one  of  them  all  of  a  nature  to  give  us 
a  clue  to  the  time  of  year  when  they  came  to  pass,  and 
this  it  docs  in  the  most  casual  manner  imaginable,  for  the 
mention  of  the  hail  draws  from  the  historian  who  records 
it  the  remark,  that  "  the  flax  and  the  barley  were  smitten, 
for  the  barley  was  in  the  ear  and  the  flax  was  boiled  ;  but 
the  ivheat  and  the  rye  were  not  smitten,  for  they  were  not 
grown  up,"  (or  rather  perhaps,  were  not  out  of  sheath.1) 
Now  this  is  precisely  such  a  degree  of  forwardness  as  we 
should  have  respectively  assigned  to  the  barley  and  wheat 
— deducing  our  conclusion  from  the  simple  circumstance 
that  the  seasons  in  Egypt  do  not  greatly  differ  from  those 
of  Judea,  and  that  in  the  latter  country  wheat  was  ripe 
and  just  gathered  at  the  Feast  of  Weeks,  barley  just  fit 
for  putting  the  sickle  into  fifty  days  sooner,  or  at  the  Pass- 
over, which  nearly  answered  to  the  time  of  the  hail.  Yet 
so  far  from  obvious  is  this  point  of  harmony,  that  nothing 
is  more  easy  than  to  mistake  it ;  nay,  nothing  more  likely 
than  that  we  should  even  at  first  suspect  Moses  himself  to 
have  been  out  in  his  reckoning,  and  thus  to  find  a  knot 
instead  of  an  argument.  For  on  reading  the  following 
passage,2  where  the  rule  is  given  for  determining  the  sec- 
ond feast,  we  might  on  the  instant  most  naturally  suppose 

1  Exod.  ix.  32.  *  Deut.  xvi.  9. 


78  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    I. 

that  the  great  wheat-harvest  of  Judea  was  in  the  month 
Abib,  at  the  Passover — "  Seven  weeks  shalt  thou  number 
unto  thee,  begin  to  number  the  seven  weeks  from  such 
time  as  thou  begin  nest  to  put  the  sickle  to  the  cor?i." 
Now  this  "  putting  the  sickle  to  the  corn  "  is  at  once  per- 
ceived to  be  at  the  Passover  when  the  wave-sheaf  was 
offered,  the  ceremony  from  which  we  see  the  Feast  of 
Weeks  was  measured  and  fixed.  Yet  had  the  wheat- 
harvest  been  here  actually  meant,  it  would  have  been 
impossible  to  reconcile  Moses  with  himself;  for  he  would 
then  have  been  representing  the  wheat  to  be  ripe  in  Judea 
at  a  season  when,  as  we  had  elsewhere  gathered  from  him, 
it  was  not  grown  up  or  out  of  the  sheath  in  Egypt.  But 
if  the  sickle  was  to  be  put  into  some  grain  much  earlier 
than  wheat,  such  as  barley,  and  if  the  barley-harvest  is 
here  alluded  to  as  falling  in  with  the  Passover,  and  not 
the  wheat-harvest,  then  all  is  clear,  intelligible,  and  free 
from  difficulty. 

Ill  a  word  then  my  argument  is— that  at  the  Passover 
the  barley  in  Judea  was  ripe,  but  that  the  wheat  was  not, 
seven  weeks  having  yet  to  elapse  before  the  first-fruits  of 
the  loaves  could  be  offered.  This  I  collect  from  the  history 
of  the  Great  Jewish  Festivals.  Again,  that  at  the  Plague 
of  Hail  (which  corresponds  with  the  time  of  the  Passover 
to  a  few  days),  the  barley  in  Egypt  was  smitten  being  in 
the  ear,  but  that  the  wheat  was  not  smitten,  not  being  yet 
boiled.  This  I  collect  from  the  history  of  the  Great  Egyp- 
tian Plagues.  The  two  statements  on  being  compared 
together,  agree  together. 

I  cannot  but  consider  this  as  very  far  from  an  unimpor- 
tant coincidence — tending,  as  it  does,  to  give  us  confidence 
in  the  good  faith  of  the  historian,  even  at  a  moment  when 
he  is  telling  of  the  Miracles  of  Egypt,  "the  wondrous 
works  that  were  done  in  the  land  of  Ham."     For,  sup- 


PART    I.  BOOKS    OF    MOSES. 


79 


ported  by  this  circumstantial  evidence,  which,  as  far  as  it 
goes,  cannot  lie,  I  feel  that  I  have  very  strong  reason  for 
believing  that  a  hail-storm  there  actually  was,  as  Moses 
asserts ;  that  the  season  of  the  year  to  which  he  assigns 
it,  was  the  season  when  it  did  in  fact  happen  ;  that  the 
crops  were  really  in  the  state  in  which  he  represents 
them  to  have  been — more  I  cannot  prove — for  further  my 
test  will  not  reach.  It  is  not  in  the  nature  of  miracles  to 
admit  of  its  immediate  application  to  themselves.  But 
when  I  see  the  ordinary  circumstances  which  attend  upon 
them,  and  which  are  most  closely  combined  with  them, 
yielding  internal  evidence  of  truth,  I  am  apt  to  think  that 
these  in  a  great  measure  vouch  for  the  truth  of  the  rest. 
Indeed,  in  all  common  cases,  even  in  judicial  cases  of  life 
and  death,  the  corroboration  of  the  evidence  of  an  un- 
impeached  witness  in  one  or  two  particulars  is  enough  to 
decide  a  jury  that  it  is  worthy  of  credit  in  every  other  par- 
ticular— that  it  may  be  safely  acted  upon  in  the  most  aw- 
ful and  responsible  of  all  human  decisions. 


XVII. 

The  argument  which  I  have  next  to  produce  has  been 
urged  by  Dr.  Graves,1  though  others  had  noticed  it  before 
him  ;2  I  shall  not,  however,  scruple  to  introduce  it  here  in 
its  order,  connected  as  it  is  with  several  more,  all  relating 
to  the  economy  of  the  camp.  The  incident  on  which  it 
turns  is  trifling  in  itself,  but  nothing  can  be  more  charac- 
teristic of  truth.  On  the  day  when  Moses  set  up  the 
Tabernacle  and  anointed  and  sanctified  it,  the  princes  of 
the  tribes  made  an  offering  consisting  of  six  waggons  and 

1  On  the  Pentateuch,  Vol.  I.  p.  111. 

2  See  Dr.  Patrick  on  Numb.  vii.  1,  8. 


80  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    I. 

twelve  oxen.  These  are  accordingly  assigned  to  the  ser- 
vice of  the  Tabernacle  :  "And  Moses  gave  them  unto  the 
Levites  ;  Two  waggons  and  four  oxen  he  gave  unto  the 
sons  of  Gershon  according  to  their  service,  and  four  wag- 
gons and  eight  oxen  he  gave  unto  the  sons  of  Merari  ac- 
cording to  their  service."1  Now  whence  this  unequal  di- 
vision ?  Why  twice  as  many  waggons  and  oxen  to  Merari 
as  to  Gershon  ?  No  reason  is  expressly  avowed.  Yet  if 
I  turn  to  a  former  chapter,  separated  however  from  the  one 
which  has  supplied  this  quotation,  by  sundry  and  divers 
details  of  other  matters,  I  am  able  to  make  out  a  very 
good  reason  for  myself.  For  there,  amongst  the  instruc- 
tions given  to  the  families  of  the  Levites,  as  to  the  shares 
they  had  severally  to  take  in  removing  the  Tabernacle 
from  place  to  place,  I  find  that  the  sons  of  Gershon  had  to 
bear  "  the  curtains."  and  the  "  Tabernacle"  itself,  (i.  e.  the 
linen  of  which  it  was  made),  and  "its  covering,  and  the 
covering  of  badgers'  skins  that  was  above  upon  it,  and  the 
hanging  for  the  door,"  and  "  the  hangings  of  the  court,  and 
the  hanging  for  the  door  of  the  gate  of  the  court,"  and 
"  their  cords,  and  all  the  instruments  of  their  service  ;"2  in 
a  word,  all  the  lighter  part  of  the  furniture  of  the  Taber- 
nacle. But  the  sons  of  Merari  had  to  bear  "  the  boards 
of  the  Tabernacle,  and  the  bars  thereof,  and  the  pillars 
thereof,  and  the  sockets  thereof,  and  the  pillars  of  the  court 
round  about,  and  their  sockets,  and  their  pins,  and  their 
cords,  with  all  their  instruments  ;"3  in  short,  all  the  cum 
brous  and  heavy  part  of  the  materials  of  which  the  frame- 
work of  the  Tabernacle  was  constructed.  And  hence  it  is 
easy  to  see  why  more  oxen  and  waggons  were  assigned  to 
the  one  family  than  to  the  other.  Is  chance  at  the  bottom 
of  all  this?  or,  cunning  contrivance?  or,  truth  and  only 
truth  ? 
i  Numb.  vii.  7,  8.  »  lb.  iv.  25.  3  lb.  iv.  32. 


PART    t.  BOOKS    OF    MOSES.  81 


XVIII. 

In  the  tenth  chapter  of  the  Book  of  Numbers  we  have 
a  particular  account  of  the  order  of  march  which  was  ob- 
served in  the  Camp  of  Israel  on  one  remarkable  occasion, 
viz.  when  they  broke  up  from  Sinai.  "  In  the  first  place 
went  the  standard  of  the  camp  of  Judah  according  to  their 
armies,"  (v.  14).  Does  this  precedence  of  Judah  agree 
with  any  former  account  of  the  disposition  of  the  armies 
of  Israel  ?  In  the  second  chapter  of  the  same  book  I  read. 
"  on  the  East  side  toward  the  rising  of  the  sun  shall  they 
of  the  standard  of  the  camp  of  Judah  pitch  throughout 
their  armies,"  (v.  3).  All  that  is  to  be  gathered  from  this 
passage  is,  that  Judah  pitched  East  of  the  Tabernacle. 
I  now  turn  to  the  tenth  chapter,  (v.  5,)  and  I  there  find 
amongst  the  orders  given  for  the  signals,  "  when  ye  blow 
an  alarm,  (i.  e.  the  first  alarm,  for  the  others  are  mention- 
ed successively  in  their  turn,)  then  the  camps  that  lie  on 
the  East  parts  shall  go  forward."  But  from  the  last  pas- 
sage it  appears  that  Judah  lay  on  the  East  parts,  there- 
fore when  the  first  alarm  was  blown,  Judah  should  be  the 
tribe  to  move.  Thus  it  is  implied  from  two  passages 
brought  together  from  two  chapters,  separated  by  the  in- 
tervention of  eight  others  relating  to  things  indifferent. 
that  Judah  was  to  lead  in  any  march.  Now  we  see  in  the 
account  of  a  specific  movement  of  the  camp  from  Sinai, 
with  which  I  introduced  these  remarks,  that  on  that  occa- 
sion Judah  did  in  fact  lead.  This  then  is  as  it  should  be. 
The  three  passages  agree  together  as  three  concurring 
witnesses — in  the  mouth  of  these  is  the  word  established. 
Yet  there  is  some  little  intricacy  in  the  details — enough  at 
least  to  leave  room  for  an  inadvertent  slip  in  the  arrange- 


82 


THE    VERACITY   OF    THE  PART    I. 


merits,  whereby  a  fiction  would  have  run  a  risk  of  being 
self-detected. 

Pursue  we  this  inquiry  a  little  further;  for  the  next 
article  of  it  is  perhaps  rather  more  open  to  a  blunder  of 
this  description  than  the  last.  It  may  be  thought  that  the 
leading  tribe,  the  van-guard  of  Israel,  was  an  object  too 
conspicuous  to  be  overlooked  or  misplaced.  In  the  18th 
verse  of  the  same  chapter  of  Numbers,  it  is  said,  that  after 
the  first  division  was  gone,  and  the  Tabernacle,  "  the 
standard  of  the  camp  of  Reuben  set  forward  according  to 
their  armies." — The  camp  of  Reuben,  therefore,  was  that 
which  moved  second  on  this  occasion.  Does  this  accord 
with  the  position  it  was  elsewhere  said  to  have  occupied  ? 
It  is  obvious  that  a  mistake  might  here  most  readily  have 
crept  in  ;  and  that  if  the  writer  had  not  been  guided  by  a 
real  knowledge  of  the  facts  which  he  was  pretending 
to  describe,  it  is  more  than  probable  he  would  have  be- 
trayed himself.  Turn  we  then  to  the  second  chapter, 
(v.  10,)  where  the  order  of  the  tribes  in  their  tents  is  given, 
and  we  there  find  that  "  on  the  south  side  was  to  be  the 
standard  of  the  camp  of  Reuben,  according  to  their 
armies."  Again,  let  us  turn  to  the  tenth  chapter,  (v.  6,) 
where  the  directions  for  the  signals  are  given,  and  we  are 
there  told,  "  When  ye  blow  the  alarm  the  second  time, 
then  the  camps  on  the  south  side  shall  take  their  journey  ;" 
— but  the  passage  last  quoted,  (which  is  far  removed  from 
this,)  informs  us  that  Reuben  was  on  the  south  side  of  the 
Tabernacle ;  the  camp  of  Reuben  therefore  it  was,  which 
was  appointed  to  move  when  the  alarm  was  blown  the 
second  time.  Accordingly  we  see  in  the  description  of  the 
actual  breaking  up  from  Sinai,  with  which  I  set  out,  that 
the  camp  of  Reuben  was  in  fact  the  second  to  move. 
The  same  argument  may  be  followed  up,  and  the  same 
satisfactory  conclusions  obtained  in  the  other  two  camps 


PART    I.  BOOKS    OF    MOSES.  83 

of  Ephraim  and  Dan  :  though  here  recourse  must  be  had 
to  the  Septuagint,  of  which  the  text  is  more  full  in  these 
two  latter  instances  than  the  Hebrew  text  of  our  own  ver- 
sion, and  more  full  precisely  upon  those  points  which  are 
wanted  in  evidence.1  On  such  a  trifle  does  the  practica- 
bility of  establishing  an  argument  of  coincidence  turn ; 
and  so  perpetually,  no  doubt,  (were  we  but  aware  of  it,) 
are  we  prevented  from  doing  justice  to  the  veracity  of  the 
writings  of  Moses,  by  the  lack  of  more  abundant  details. 

In  all  this,  it  appears  to  me,  that  without  any  care  or 
circumspection  of  the  historian,  as  to  how  he  should  make 
the  several  parts  of  his  tale  agree  together — without  any 
display  on  the  one  hand,  or  mock  concealment  on  the 
other,  of  a  harmony  to  be  found  in  those  several  parts — 
and  in  the  meantime,  with  ample  scope  for  the  admission 
of  unguarded  mistakes,  by  which  a  mere  impostor  would 
soon  stand  convicted,  the  whole  is  at  unity  with  itself,  and 
the  internal  evidence  resulting  from  it  clear,  precise,  and 
above  suspicion. 


XIX. 

1.  The  arrangements  of  the  camp  provide  us  with  an- 
other coincidence,  no  less  satisfactory  than  the  last — for  it 
may  be  here  remarked,  that  in  proportion  as  the  history 
of  Moses  descends  to  particulars,  (which  it  does  in  the 
camp,)  in  that  proportion  is  it  fertile  in  the  arguments  of 
which  I  am  at  present  in  search.  It  is  in  general  the 
extreme  brevity  of  the  history,  and  nothing  else,  that 
baffles  us  in  our  inquiries ;  often  affording  (as  it  does)  a 
hint  which  we  cannot  pursue  for  want  of  details,  and  ex- 

1  Septuagint.  Numb.  x.  6. 


84  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART  I. 

hibiting  a  glimpse  of  some  corroborative  fact  which  it  is 
vexatious  to  be  so  near  grasping,  and  still  to  be  compelled 
to  relinquish  it. 

In  the  sixteenth  chapter  of  the  Book  of  Numbers  we 
read,  "Now  Korah  the  son  of  Izhar,  the  son  of  Kohath 
the  son  of  Levi,  and  Dathan  and  Abiram  the  sons  of 
Eliab,  and  On  the  son  of  Peleth,  sons  of  Reuben,   took 
men,  and  they  rose  up  before  Moses  with  certain  of  the 
congregation  of  Israel,  two  hundred  and  fifty  princes  of 
the  assembly,  famous  in  the  congregation,  men  of  renown. 
And  they  gathered  themselves  together  against  Moses  and 
against  Aaron,  and  said  unto   them,  Ye  take  too  much 
upon  you,  seeing  all  the  congregation  are  holy,  every  one 
of  them,  and  the  Lord  is  among  them ;   wherefore  then 
lift  ye  up  yourselves  above  the  congregation  of  the  Lord."1 
Such  is  the  history  of  the  conspiracy  got  up  against  the 
authority  of  the  leaders  of  Israel.     The  principal   parties 
engaged  in  it,  we  see,  were  Korah  of  the  family  of  Kohath, 
and  Dathan,  Abiram,  and  On,  of  the  family  of  Reuben. 
Now  it  is  a  very  curious  circumstance  that  some  thirteen 
chapters  before  this — chapters   occupied  with  matters  of 
quite  another  character — it  is  mentioned  incidentally  that 
"  the  families  of  the  sons  of  Kohath  were  to  pitch  on  the 
side  of  the   Tabernacle  southward"*    And   in    another 
chapter  yet  further  back,  and  as  independent  of  the  latter  as 
the  latter  was  of  the  first,  we  read  no  less  incidentally,  "  on 
the  south  side  (of  the  Tabernacle)  shall  be  the  standard  of 
the  camp  of  Reuben,  according  to   their  armies."3     The 
family  of  Kohath,  therefore,  and   the  famity  of  Reuben, 
both   pitched  on   the  same  side  of  the  Tabernacle— they 
were  neighbors,  and  were  therefore  conveniently  situated 
for  taking  secret  counsel  together.     Surely  this  singular 

I  Numb.  xvi.  1.  «  lb.  iii.  29.  3  lb.  ii.  10. 


PART    I.  BOOKS    OF    MOSES.  85 

coincidence  comes  of  truth — not  of  accident,  not  of  design  ; 
— not  of  accident,  for  how  great  is  the  improbability  that 
such  a  peculiar  propriety  between  tbe  relative  situations 
of  the  parties  in  the  conspiracy  should  have  been  the  mere 
result  of  chance  ;  when  three  sides  of  the  Tabernacle  were 
occupied  by  the  families  of  the  Levites,  and  all  four  sides 
by  the  families  of  the  tribes,  and  when  combinations 
(arithmetically  speaking),  to  so  great  an  extent  might 
have  been  formed  between  these  in  their  several  members, 
without  the  one  in  question  being  of  the  number.  It  does 
not  come  of  design,  for  the  agreement  is  not  obvious 
enough  to  suit  a  designer's  purpose — it  might  most  easily 
escape  notice : — it  is  indeed  only  to  be  detected  by  the 
juxtaposition  of  several  unconnected  passages  falling  out 
at  long  intervals.  Then,  again,  had  no  such  coincidence 
been  found  at  all ;  had  the  conspirators  been  represented 
as  drawn  together  from  more  distant  parts  of  the  camp, 
from  such  parts  as  afforded  no  peculiar  facilities  for  leaguing 
together,  no  objection  whatever  would  have  lain  against 
the  accuracy  of  the  narrative  on  that  account.  The  argu- 
ment, indeed,  for  its  veracity  would  then  have  been  lost, 
but  that  would  have  been  all ;  no  suspicion  whatever 
against  its  veracity  would  have  been  thereby  incurred. 

2.  But  there  is  yet  another  feature  of  truth  in  this 
same  most  remarkable  portion  of  Mosaic  history ;  and  this 
has  been  enlarged  upon  by  Dr.  Graves.1  I  shall  not  how- 
ever scruple  to  touch  upon  it  here,  both  because  I  do  not 
take  quite  the  same  view  of  it  throughout,  and  because 
this  incident  combines  with  the  one  1  have  just  brought 
forward,  and  thus  acquires  a  value  beyond  its  own,  from 
being  a  second  of  its  kind  arising  out  of  one  and  the  same 
event — the  united  value  of  two  incidental  marks  of  truth 

>  On  the  Pentateuch,  Vol.  I.  p.  155. 


86  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    I. 

being  more  than  the  sum  of  their  separate  values.  In- 
deed, these  two  instances  of  consistency  without  design, 
taken  together,  hedge  in  the  main  transaction  on  the  right 
hand  and  on  the  left,  so  as  almost  to  close  up  every  avenue 
through  which  suspicion  could  insinuate  the  rejection  of  it. 
On  a  common  perusal  of  the  whole  history  of  this  re- 
bellion, in  the  sixteenth  chapter  of  Numbers,  the  impres- 
sion left  would  be,  that,  in  the  punishment  of  Korah,  Da- 
than,  and  Abiram,  there  was  no  distinction  or  difference  ; 
that  their  tents  and  all  the  men  that  appertained  unto 
Korah,  and  all  their  goods,  were  destroyed  alike.  Never- 
theless, ten  chapters  after,  when  the  number  of  the  chil- 
dren of  Israel  is  taken,  and  when  in  the  course  of  the  num- 
bering, the  names  of  Dathan  and  Abiram  occur,  there  is 
added  the  following  incidental  memorandum — "  This  is 
that  Dathan  and  Abiram  who  were  famous  in  the  congre- 
gation, who  strove  against  Moses  and  against  Aaron,  in 
the  company  of  Korah,  when  they  strove  against  the 
Lord."  Then  the  death  which  they  died  is  mentioned,  and 
last  of  all  it  is  said,  "Notwithstanding  the  children  of 
Korah  died  not?^  This,  at  first  sight,  undoubtedly  looks 
like  a  contradiction  of  what  had  gone  before.  Again,  then, 
let  us  turn  back  to  the  16th  chapter,  and  see  whether  we 
have  read  it  right.  Now,  though  upon  a  second  perusal  I 
still  find  no  express  assertion  that  there  was  any  differ- 
ence in  the  fate  of  these  several  rebellious  households,  I 
think  upon  a  close  inspection  I  do  find  (what  answers  my 
purpose  better)  some  difference  implied.  For,  in  verse  27, 
we  are  told,  (;So  they  gat  up  from  the  Tabernacle  of  Ko- 
rah, Dathan,  and  Abiram,  on  every  side;" — i.e.  from  a 
Tabernacle  which  these  men  in  their  political  rebellion  and 
religious  dissent  (for  they  went  together)  had  set  up  in 

1  Numb.  xxvi.  11. 


PART    I.  BOOKS    OF    MOSES.  87 

common  for  themselves  and  their  adherents,  in  opposition 
to  the  great  Tabernacle  of  the  congregation.  "  And  Da- 
than  and  Abiram,"  it  is  added,  "  came  out  and  stood  in  the 
door  of  their  tents ;  and  their  wives,  and  their  sons,  and 
their  little  children."  Here  we  perceive  that  mention  is 
made  of  the  sons  of  Dathan  and  the  sons  of  Abiram,  but 
not  of  the  sons  of  Korah.  So  that  the  victims  of  the  ca- 
tastrophe about  to  happen,  it  should  seem  from  this  ac- 
count too,  were  indeed  the  sons  of  Dathan  and  the  sons 
of  Abiram,  but  not  (in  all  appearance)  the  sons  of  Korah. 
Neither  is  this  difference  difficult  to  account  for.  The  Le- 
vites  pitching  nearer  to  the  Tabernacle  than  the  other 
tribes,  forming,  in  fact,  three  sides  of  the  inner  square, 
whilst  the  others  formed  the  four  sides  of  the  outer,  it 
would  necessarily  follow,  that  the  dwelling-tent  of  Korah, 
a  Levite,  would  be  at  some  distance  from  the  dwelling- 
tents  of  Dathan  and  Abiram,  Reubenites,  and,  as  brothers, 
probably  contiguous  ;  at  such  a  distance  at  least,  as  might 
serve  to  secure  it  from  being  involved  in  the  destruction 
which  overwhelmed  the  others  ;  for,  that  the  desolation 
was  very  limited  in  extent,  seems  a  fact  conveyed  by  the 
terms  of  the  warning — "  Depart  from  the  tents  of  these 
wicked  men,"  (i.  e.  the  tabernacle  which  the  three  leaders 
had  reared  in  common,  and  the  two  dwelling-tents  of  Da- 
than and  Abiram,')  as  if  the  danger  was  confined  to  the 
vicinity  of  those  tents. 

In  this  single  event,  then,  the  rebellion  of  Korah,  Dathan, 
and  Abiram,  I  discover  two  instances  of  coincidence  with- 
out design,  each  independent  of  the  other — the  one,  in  the 
conspiracy  being  laid  amongst  parties  whom  I  know,  from 
information  elsewhere  given,  to  have  dwelt  on  the  same 
side  of  the  Tabernacle,  and  therefore  to  have  been  conve- 

1  See  chap.  xvi.  verse  27.  An  attention  to  this  verse  shows  these  to 
have  been  the  tents  meant. 


88  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    I. 

niently  situated  for  such  a  plot — the  other,  in  the  different 
lots  of  the  families  of  the  conspirators,  a  difference  of  which 
there  is  just  hint  enough  in  the  direct  history  of  it,  to  be 
brought  out  by  a  casual  assertion  to  that  effect  in  a  subse- 
quent, casual  allusion  to  the  conspiracy,  and  only  just  hint 
enough  for  this — a  difference,  too,  which  accords  very  re- 
markably with  the  relative  situations  of  those  several  fam- 
ilies in  their  respective  tents. 

But  if  the  existence  of  a  conspiracy  be  by  this  means 
established,  above  all  dispute,  as  a  matter  of  fact — if  the 
death  of  some  of  the  families  of  the  conspirators,  and  the 
escape  of  others,  be  also  by  the  same  means  established, 
above  all  dispute,  as  another  matter  of  fact — if  the  testi- 
mony of  Moses,  after  having  been  submitted  to  a  test  which 
he  could  never  have  contemplated  or  been  provided  against 
turn  out  in  these  particulars  at  least  to  be  quite  worthy  of 
credit — to  what  are  we  led  on  1  Is  not  the  historian  still 
the  same :  is  he  not  still  treating  of  the  same  incident, 
when  he  informs  us  that  the  punishment  of  this  rebellious 
spirit  was  a  miraculous  punishment  1  that  the  ground 
clave  asunder  that  was  under  the  ringleaders,  and  swal- 
lowed them  up,  and  their  houses,  and  all  the  men  that  ap- 
pertained unto  them,  and  all  their  goods  ;  so  that  they, 
and  all  that  appertained  unto  them,  went  down  alive  into 
the  pit,  and  the  earth  closed  upon  them,  and  they  per- 
ished from  among  the  congregation? 


XX. 

The  arrangements  of  the  camp  suggest  one  point  of 
coincidence  more,  not  perhaps  so  remarkable  as  the  last, 
yet  enough  so  to  be  admitted  amongst  others  as  an  indi- 
cation of  truth  in  the  history. 


PART    I.  BOOKS    OF    MOSES.  89 

In  the  32nd  chapter  of  Numbers,  (v.  1,)  it  is  said, 
"  Now  the  children  of  Reuben,  and  the  children  of  Gad, 
had  a  very  great  multitude  of  cattle  ;  and  when  they  saw 
the  land  of  Jazer,  and  the  land  of  Gilead,  that  behold  the 
place  was  a  place  for  cattle,  the  children  of  Gad  and  the 
children  of  Reuben  came  and  spake  unto  Moses,  and  to 
Eleazer  the  priest,  and  unto  the  princes  of  the  congrega- 
tion, saying,  Ataroth,  and  Dibon,  and  Jazer,  and  Nimrah, 
and  Heshbon,  and  Elealeh,  and  Shebam,  and  Nebo,  and 
Beon,  even  the  country  which  the  Lord  smote  before  the 
congregation  of  Israel,  is  a  land  for  cattle,  and  thy  servants 
have  cattle;  wherefore,  said  they,  if  we  have  received 
grace  in  thy  sight,  let  this  land  be  given  unto  thy  servants 
for  a  possession,  and  bring  us  not  over  Jordan." 

Here  was  a  petition  from  the  tribes  of  Reuben  and  of 
Gad,  to  have  a  portion  assigned  them  on  the  east  side  of 
Jordan,  rather  than  in  the  land  of  Canaan.  But  how 
came  the  request,  to  be  made  conjointly  by  the  children  of 
Reuben  and  the  children  of  Gad  ?— Was  it  a  mere  acci- 
dent?— Was  it  the  simple  circumstance  that,  these  two 
tribes  being  richer  in  cattle  than  the  rest,  and  seeing  that 
the  pasturage  was  good  on  the  east  side  of  Jordan,  desired 
on  that  account  only  to  establish  themselves  there  to- 
gether, and  to  separate  from  their  brethren?  Perhaps 
something  more  than  either.  For  I  read  in  the  2nd  chap- 
ter of  Numbers,  (v.  10, 14,)  that  the  camp  of  Reuben  was  on 
the  south  side  of  the  tabernacle,  and  that  the  tribe  of  Gad 
formed  a  division  of  the  camp  of  Reuben.  It  may  very 
well  be  imagined,  therefore,  that  after  having  shared  to- 
gether the  perils  of  the  long  and  arduous  campaign  through 
the  wilderness,  these  two  tribes,  in  addition  to  considera- 
tions about  their  cattle,  feeling  the  strong  bond  of  well-tried 
companionship  in  hardships  and  in  arms,  were  very  likely 
to  act  with  one  comunn  council,  and  to  have  a  desire  still 


90  THE    VERACITY    OF   THE  PART    I. 

to  dwell  beside  one  another,  after  the  toil  of  battle,  as  quiet 
neighbors  in  a  peaceful  country  where  they  were  finally 
to  set  up  their  rest.  Here  again  is  an  incident,  I  think, 
beyond  the  reach  of  the  most  refined  impostor  in  the 
world.  What  vigilance,  however  alive  to  suspicion,  and 
prepared  for  it — what  cunning,  however  bent  upon  giving 
credibility  to  a  worthless  narrative,  by  insidiously  scatter- 
ing through  it  marks  of  truth  which  should  turn  up  from 
time  to  time  and  mislead  the  reader,  would  have  suggested 
one  so  very  trivial,  so  very  far  fetched,  as  a  desire  of  two 
tribes  to  obtain  their  inheritance  together  on  the  same 
side  of  the  river,  simply  upon  the  recollection  that  such  a 
desire  would  fall  in  very  naturally  with  their  having 
pitched  their  tents  side  by  side  in  their  previous  march 
through  the  wilderness  ? 


XXI. 

Some  circumstances  in  the  history  of  Balak  and  Balaam 
supply  me  with  another  argument  for  the  veracity  of  the 
Pentateuch.  But  before  I  proceed  to  those  which  I  have 
more  immediately  in  my  eye,  I  would  observe,  that  the  sim- 
ple fact  of  a  King  of  Moab  knowing  that  a  Prophet  dwelt 
in  Mesopotamia,  in  the  mountains  of  the  East,  a  country 
so  distant  from  his  own,  in  itself  supplies  a  point  of  harmony 
favoring  the  truth  and  reality  of  the  narrative.  For  I  am 
led  by  it  to  remark  this,  that  very  many  hints  may  be  picked 
up  in  the  writings  of  Moses,  all  concurring  to  establish  one 
position,  viz.  that  there  was  a  communication  amongst  the 
scattered  inhabitants  of  the  earth  in  those  early  times,  a 
circulation  of  intelligence,  scarcely  to  be  expected,  and  not 
easily  to  be  accounted  for.  Whether  the  caravans  of  mer- 
chants which,  as  we  have  seen,  traversed  the  deserts  of  the 


PART    I.  BOOKS    OF    MOSES.  91 

East — whether  the  unsettled  and  vagrant  habits  of  the 
descendants  of  Ishmael  and  Esau,  which  singularly  fitted 
them  for  being  the  carriers  of  news,  and  with  whom  the 
great  wilderness  was  alive — whether  the  pastoral  life  of 
the  Patriarchs,  and  of  those  who  more  immediately  sprung 
from  them,  which  led  them  to  constant  changes  of  place 
in  search  of  herbage — whether  the  frequent  petty  wars 
which  were  waged  amongst  lawless  neighbors — whether 
the  necessary  separation  of  families,  the  parent  hive  cast- 
ing its  little  colony  forth  to  settle  on  some  distant  land, 
and  the  consequent  interest  and  curiosity  which  either 
branch  would  feel  for  the  fortunes  of  the  other — whether 
these  were  the  circumstances  that  encouraged  and  main- 
tained an  intercourse  among  mankind  in  spite  of  the 
numberless  obstacles  which  must  then  have  opposed  it, 
and  which  we  might  have  imagined  would  have  inter- 
cepted it  altogether;  or  whether  any  other  channels  of  in- 
telligence were  open  of  which  we  are  in  ignorance,  sure  it 
is.  that  such  intercourse  seems  to  have  existed  to  a  very 
considerable  extent. 

Thus,  far  as  Abraham  was  removed  from  the  branch 
of  his  family  which  remained  in  Mesopotamia,  "  it  came 
to  pass  that  it  was  told  him,  saying,  Behold,  Milcah,  she 
hath  also  borne  children  unto  thy  brother  Nahor;"  and 
their  names  are  then  added.1  In  like  manner  Isaac  and 
Rebekah  appear  in  their  turn  to  have  known  that  Laban 
had  marriageable  daughters;2 — and  Jacob,  when  he  came 
back  to  Canaan  after  his  long  sojourn  in  Haran,  seems  to 
have  known  that  E-^au  was  alive  and  prosperous,  and  that 
he  lived  at  Seir,  whither  he  sent  a  message  to  him  ;3 — and 
Deborah,  Rebekah's  nurse,  who  went  with  her  to  Canaan 
on  her  marriage,  is  found   many  years  afterwards   in  the 

'  Gen.  xxii.  20.  *  lb.  xxviii.  2.  3  lb.  xxxii.  3. 


92  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    I. 

family  of  Jacob,  for  she  dies  in  his  camp  as  he  was  return- 
ing from  Haran,1  and  therefore  must  have  been  sent  back 
again  meanwhile,  for  some  purpose  or  other,  from  Canaan 
to  Haran  ; — and  at  Elim,  in  the  desert,  the  Israelites  dis- 
cover twelve  wells  of  water  and  threescore  and  ten  palms, 
the  numbers,  no  doubt,  not  accidental,  but  indicating  that 
some  persons  had  frequented  this  secluded  spot  acquainted 
with  the  sons  and  grandsons  of  Jacob  ;2 — and  Jethro,  the 
father-in-law  of  Moses,  is  said  "  to  have  heard  of  all  that 
God  had  done  for  Moses  and  for  Israel  his  people."3  And 
when  Moses,  on  his  march,  sends  a  message  to  Edom,  it 
is  worded,  "  thouknoicest  all  the  travail  that  hath  befallen 
us — how  our  fathers  went  down  into  Egypt,  and  we  have 
dwelt  in  Egypt  a  long  time  ;"4  together  with  many  more 
particulars,  all  of  which  Moses  reckons  matters  of  notoriety 
to  the  inhabitants  of  the  desert.  And  on  another  occasion 
he  speaks  of  "  their  having  heard  that  the  Lord  was 
among  his  people,  that  he  was  seen  by  them  face  to  face, 
that  his  cloud  stood  over  them,  and  that  he  went  before 
them  by  day-time  in  a  pillar  of  cloud,  and  in  a  pillar  of 
fire  by  night."5  And  this  may,  in  fact,  account  for  the 
vestiges  of  so  many  laws  which  we  meet  with  throughout 
the  East,  even  in  this  very  early  period,  as  held  in  common 
— and  the  many  just  notions  of  the  Deity,  mixed  up, 
indeed,  with  much  alloy,  which  so  many  nations  possessed 
in  common — and  the  rites  and  customs,  whether  civil  or 
sacred,  to  which  in  so  many  points  they  conformed  in 
common.  Now  all  these  unconnected  matters  hint  at  this 
one  circn?nstance,  that  intelligence  travelled  through  the 
tribes  of  the  Desert  more  freely  and  rapidly  than  might 
have  been  thought,  and  the  consistency  with  which  the 

i  Gen.  xxxv.  8.  2  Exod.  xv.  27.  3  lb.  xviii.  1. 

4  Numb.  xx.  15.  5  lb.  xiv.  14. 


PART    I.  BOOKS    OF    MOSES.  93 

writings  of  Moses  imply  such  a  fact,  (for  they  neither  affirm 
it,  nor  trouble  themselves  about  explaining  it,)  is  a  feature 
of  truth  in  those  writings. 


XXII 

Through  some  or  other  of  the  channels  of  information 
enumerated  in  the  last  paragraph,  Balak,  King  of  Moab, 
is  aware   of  the  existence  of  a  Prophet  at  Pethor,  and 
sends  for  him.     It  is  not  unlikely,  indeed,  that  the  Moab- 
ites,  who  were  the  children  of  Lot,  should  have  still  main- 
tained  a  communication  with   the  original  stock  of  all 
which  continued  to  dwell  in  Aram  or  Mesopotamia.     Nei- 
ther is  it  unlikely  that  Pethor,  which  was  in  that  country,1 
the  country  whence  Abraham  emigrated,  and  where  Nahor 
and  that  branch  of  Terah's  family  remained,  should  pos- 
sess a  Prophet  of  the  true  God.     Nor  is  it  unlikely  again, 
that,  living  in  the  midst  of  idolaters,   Balaam  should  in  a 
degree  partake  of  the  infection,  as  Laban  had  done  before 
him  in  the  same  country;    and  that  whilst  he  acknowl- 
edged the  Lord  for  his  God,  and  offered  his  victims  by 
sevens,  (as    some   patriarchal   tradition  perhaps   directed 
him,2)  he  should  have  had   recourse  to  enchantments  also 
— mixing  the  profane  and  sacred,  as  Laban  did  the  wor- 
ship of  his  images  with  the  worship  of  his  Maker.     All 
this  is  in  character.     Now  it  was   not  Balak  alone  who 
sent  the  embassy  to  Balaam.     He  was  but  King  of  the 
Moabites.  and   had  nothing  to  do  with  Midian.     With  the 
elders  of   Midian,  however,   he  consulted,   they  being  as 
much  interested  as  himself  in  putting  a  stop  to  the  tri- 
•  umphant  march  of  Israel.     Accordingly  we  find  that  the 

«  Numb,  xxiii.  7.  2  See  Job  xlii.  B. 


94  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    I. 

mission  to  the  Prophet  came  from  the  two  people  conjoint- 
ly ; — "  the  elders  of  Moab  and  the  elders  of  Midian  de- 
parted, with  the  rewards  of  divination  in  their  hand."1  In 
the  remainder  of  this  interview,  and  in  the  one  which 
succeeded  it,  all  mention  of  Midian  is  dropped,  and  the 
"  princes  of  Balak,"  and  the  "  servants  of  Balak,"  are  the 
titles  given  to  the  messengers.  And  when  Balaam  at 
length  consents  to  accept  their  invitation,  it  is  to  Moab,  the 
kingdom  of  Balak,  that  he  comes,  and  he  is  received  by 
the  King  at  one  of  his  own  border-cities  near  the  river  of 
Anion.  Then  follows  the  Prophet's  fruitless  struggle  to 
curse  the  people  whom  God  had  blessed,  and  the  conse- 
quent disappointment  of  the  King,  who  bids  him  "  flee  to 
his  place,  the  Lord  having  kept  him  back  from  honor ;" 
"and  Balaam  rose  up,"  the  history  concludes,  "and  went 
and  returned  to  his  place,  and  Balak  also  went  his  way."2 
So  they  parted  in  mutual  dissatisfaction. 

Hitherto,  then,  although  the  elders  of  Midian  were  con- 
cerned in  inviting  the  Prophet  from  Mesopotamia,  it  does 
not  appear  that  they  had  any  intercourse  whatever  with 
him  on  their  own  account — Balak  and  the  Moabites  had 
engrossed  all  his  attention.  The  subject  is  now  discon- 
tinued :  Balaam  disappears,  gone,  as  we  may  suppose,  to 
his  own  country  again,  to  Pethor,  in  Mesopotamia,  for  he 
had  expressly  said  on  parting,  "  Behold,  I  go  unto  my 
peojile."3  Meanwhile  the  historian  pursues  his  onward 
course,  and  details,  through  several  long  chapters,  the 
abandoned  profligacy  of  the  Israelites,  the  numbering  of 
them  according  to  their  families,  the  method  by  which 
their  portions  were  to  be  assigned  in  the  land  of  promise, 
the  laws  of  inheritance,  the  choice  and  appointment  of  a 
successor    a  series  of  offerings  and   festivals   of  various 

»  Numb.  xxii.  7.  *  lb.  xxiv.  25.  3  lb.  xxiv.  14. 


PART    I.  BOOKS    OF    MOSES.  95 

kinds,  more  or  less  important,  the  nature  and  obligation 
of  vows,  and  the  different  complexion  they  assumed  under 
different  circumstances  enumerated,  and  then,  (as  it  often 
happens  in  the  history  of  Moses,  where  a  battle  or  a  rebel- 
lion perhaps  interrupts  a  catalogue  of  rites  and  cere- 
monies,) then,  I  say,  comes  an  account  of  an  attack  made 
upon  the  Midianites  in  revenge  for  their  having  seduced 
the  people  of  Israel  by  the  wiles  of  their  women.  So 
"  they  slew  the  kings  of  Midian,  besides  the  rest  of  them 
that  were  slain,  viz.  Evi,  and  Rekem,  and  Zur.  and  Hur, 
and  Reba,  five  kings  of  Midian  ;"  and  lastly,  there  is  ad- 
ded, what  we  might  not  perhaps  have  been  prepared  for, 
"  Balaam  also,  the  son  of  Beor,  they  slew  with  the 
sivord"1 

It  seems  then,  but  how  incidentally  !  that  the  Prophet 
did  not,  after  all.  return  to  Mesopotamia,  as  we  had  sup- 
posed. Now  this  coincides  in  a  very  satisfactory  manner 
with  the  circumstances  under  which,  we  have  seen,  Ba- 
laam was  invited  from  Pethor.  For  the  deputation,  which 
then  waited  on  him,  did  not  consist  of  Moabites  exclusively, 
but  of  Midianites  also.  When  dismissed,  therefore,  in 
disgust  by  the  Moabites,  he  would  not  return  to  Mesopota- 
mia until  he  had  paid  his  visit  to  the  Midianites,  who 
were  equally  concerned  in  bringing  him  where  he  was. 
Had  the  details  of  his  achievements  in  Midian  been  given, 
as  those  in  Moab  are  given,  they  might  have  been  as  nu- 
merous, as  important,  and  as  interesting.  One  thing  only, 
however,  we  are  told,  that  by  the  counsel  which  he  sug- 
gested during  this  visit  concerning  the  matter  of  Peor,  and 
which  he  probably  thought  was  the  most  likely  counsel  to 
alienate  the  Israelites  from  God,  and  to  make  Him  curse 
instead  of  blessing  them,  he  caused  the  children  of  Israel 

1  Numb.  !is.  8. 


96  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    I. 

to  commit  the  trespass  he  anticipated,  and  to  fall  into  the 
trap  which  he  had  provided  for  them.  Unluckily  for  him, 
however,  his  stay  amongst  the  Midianites  was  unseason- 
ably protracted,  and  Moses  coming  upon  them,  as  we  have 
seen,  by  command  of  God,  slew  them  and  him  together. 
The  undesigned  coincidence  lies  in  the  Elders  of  Moab 
and  the  Elders  of  Midian  going  to  Balaam  ;  in  Midian 
being  then  mentioned  no  more,  till  Balaam,  having  been 
sent  away  from  Moab,  apparently  that  he  might  go  home, 
is  subsequently  found  a  corpse  amongst  the  slaughtered 
Midianites. 


XXIII. 

In  the  consequences  which  followed  from  this  evil  coun- 
sel of  Balaam,  I  fancy  I  discover  another  instance  of  coin- 
cidence without  design.  It  is  this.— As  a  punishment  for 
the  sin  of  the  Israelites  in  partaking  of  the  worship  of 
Baal-Peor,  God  is  said  to  have  sent  a  plague  upon  them. 
Who  were  the  leaders  in  this  defection  from  the  Almighty, 
and  in  this  shameless  adoption  of  the  abomination  of  the 
Moabites,  is  not  disclosed — nor  indeed  whether  any  one 
tribe  were  more  guilty  before  God  than  the  rest — only  it 
is  said  that  the  number  of  "  those  who  died  in  the  Plague 
was  twenty  and  four  thousand."1  I  read,  however,  that 
the  name  of  a  certain  Israelite  that  was  slain  on  that  oc- 
casion, (who  in  the  general  humiliation  and  mourning,  de- 
fied, as  it  were,  the  vengeance  of  the  Most  High,  and  de- 
termined, at  all  hazards,  to  continue  in  the  lusts  to  which 
the  idolatry  had  led,)  I  read,  I  say,  that  "  the  name  of 
this  Israelite  that  was  slain,  even  that  was  slain  with  the 

1  Numb.  xxv.  9. 


PART    I.  BOOKS    OF    MOSES.  97 

Midianitish  woman,  was  Zimri,  the  son  of  Salu,  a  prince 
of  a  chief  house  among  the  Simeonites."1  And  very  great 
importance  is  attached  to  this  act  of  summary  punishment 
—as  though  this  one  offender,  a  prince  of  a  chief  house 
of  his  tribe,  was  a  representative,  of  the  offence  of  many— 
for  on  Phinehas,  in  his  holy  indignation,  putting  him  to 
instant  death,  the  Plague  ceased.  «  So  the  Plague  was 
stayed  from  the  children  of  Israel."2 

Shortly  after  this  a  census  of  the  people  is  taken.     All 
the  tribes  are  numbered,  and  a  separate  account  is  given 
of  each.     Now  in  this  I  observe  the  following  particular— 
that,   although  on   comparing  this  census  with   the  one 
which  had  been  made  nearly  forty  years  before  at  Sinai,  it 
appears  that  the  majority  of  the  tribes  had  meanwhile  in- 
creased in  numbers,  and  none  of  them  very  materially  di- 
minished,3 the  tribe  of  Simeon  had  lost  almost  two-thirds 
of  its  whole  body,  being  reduced  from  " fifty-nine  thousand 
and  three  hundred,""  to  "  twenty-two  thousand  and  two 
hundred."5     No  reason  is  assigned  for  this  extraordinary 
depopulation  of  this  one  tribe—no  hint  whatever  is  given 
as  to  its  eminence  in  suffering  above  its  fellows.     Nor  can 
I  pretend  to  say  that  we  can  detect  the  reason  with  any 
certainty  of  being  right,  though  the  fact  speaks  for  itself 
that  the  tribe  of  Simeon  must  have  experienced  disaster 
beyond  the  rest.     Yet  it  does  seem  very  natural  to  think, 
that,  in  the  recent  Plague,  the  tribe  to  which  Zimri  be- 
longed, who  is  mentioned  as  a  leading  person  in   it  with 
great  emphasis,  was  the  tribe  upon  which  the  chief  fury 
of  the  scourge  fell— as  having  been  that  which  had  been 
the  chief  transgressors  in  the  idolatry. 

Moreover,  that  such  was  the  case,  I  am  further  inclined 
to  believe  from  another  circumstance.     One  of  the  last 

»  Numb.  xxv.  14.  2  ib.  xxv.  8.  3  Comp.  lb.  i.  and  xxvi. 

4  lb.  i.  23.  s  ib.  xxvi.  14. 

9 


98  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    I. 

great  acts  which  Moses  was  commissioned  to  perform  be- 
fore his  death,  has  a  reference  to  this  very  affair  of  Baal- 
Peor.  "  Avenge  the  children  of  Israel,"  says  God  to  him, 
"of  the  Midianites ;  afterward  thou  shalt  be  gathered 
unto  thy  people."1  Moses  did  so :  but  before  he  actually 
was  gathered  to  his  people,  and  while  the  recent  extermi- 
nation of  this  guilty  nation  must  have  been  fresh  in  his 
mind,  he  proceeds  to  pronounce  a  parting  blessing  on  the 
tribes.  Now  it  is  singular,  and  except  upon  some  such 
supposition  as  this  I  am  maintaining,  unaccountable,  that 
whilst  he  deals  out  the  bounties  of  earth  and  heaven  with 
a  prodigal  hand  upon  all  the  others,  the  tribe  of  Simeon  he 
jiasses  over  in  silence,  and  none  but  the  tribe  of  Simeon 
— for  this  he  has  no  blessing2 — an  omission  which  should 
seem  to  have  some  meaning,  and  which  does  in  fact,  as  I 
apprehend,  point  to  this  same  matter  of  Baal  Peor.  For  if 
that  was  pre-eminently  the  offending  tribe,  nothing  could 
be  more  likely  than  that  Moses,  fresh,  as  I  have  said,  from 
the  destruction  of  the  Midianites  for  their  sin,  should  re- 
member their  principal  partners  in  it  too,  and  should  think 
it  hard  measure  to  slay  the  one,  and  forthwith  bless  the 

1  Numb.  xxxi.  2. 
2  Deut.  xxxiii.  6.     It  is  nothing  but  fair  to  state  that  the  reading  of  the 

Codex  Alexandr.  is,  £i'irb]  'PovPnn   Kal  fii)   U7ro0ni/£r<.>,  Kal  Etificui/   ivTio  Tro\i>s   iv 

dpiOftij.  "  Let  Reuben  live  and  not  die,  and  let  Simeon  be  many  in  num- 
ber." This  reading,  however,  the  Codex  Vaticanus,  the  rival  MS.  of  the 
Alexandrine,  and  at  least  its  equal  in  authority,  does  not  recognize  :  neither 
is  it  found  in  the  Hebrew  text,  nor  in  any  of  the  various  readings  of  that 
text  as  given  by  Dr.  Kennicott,  nor  in  the  Samaritan,  nor  in  the  early  Ver- 
sions. It  is  difficult  to  believe  that  the  name  of  Simeon  should  have  been 
omitted  in  so  many  instances  by  mistake  ;  whilst  it  is  easy  to  suppose  that 
it  might  have  been  introduced  in  some  one  instance  by  design,  the  tran- 
scriber not  aware  of  any  cause  for  the  exclusion  of  this  one  tribe,  and  say- 
ing, "  Peradvcnture,  it  is  an  oversight."  Moreover,  the  blessing  of  Reuben 
thus  curtailed,  "  Let  Reuben  Live  and  not  die,"  seems  tame,  and  unworthy 
the  party  and  the  occasion. 


PART    I.  BOOKS    OF    MOSES.  99 

other.  Nor  can  I  help  remarking,  in  further  support  of 
tliis  conjecture,  that  the  little  consideration  paid  to  this 
tribe  by  their  brethren  shortly  afterwards,  in  the  allotment 
of  the  portions  of  the  Holy  Land,  implies  it  to  have  been 
in  disgrace — their  inheritance  being  only  the  remnant  of 
that  assigned  to  the  children  of  Judah.  which  was  too  much 
for  them  ;'  and  so  inadequate  to  their  wants  did  it  prove, 
that  in  after-times  they  sent  forth  a  colony  even  to  Mount 
Seir. 

Admitting,  then,  the  fact  to  be  as  I  have  supposed,  it  sup- 
ports (as  in  so  many  other  cases  already  mentioned)  the 
credibility  of  a  miracle.  For  the  name  of  the  audacious 
offender  points  incidentally  to  the  offending  tribe — the  ex- 
traordinary diminution  of  that  tribe  points  to  some  extra- 
ordinary cause  of  the  diminution — the  pestilence  presents 
itself  as  a  probable  cause — and  if  the  real  cause,  then  it 
becomes  the  judicial  punishment  of  a  transgression,  a  mir- 
acle wrought  by  God  (as  Moses  would  have  it),  in  token 
that  his  wrath  was  kindled  against  Israel. 

So  much  for  the  Books  of  Moses ;  not  that  I  believe  the 
subject  exhausted,  for  I  doubt  not  that  many  examples  of 
coincidence  without  design  in  the  writings  of  Moses  have 
escaped  me,  which  others  may  detect,  as  one  eye  will  often 
see  what  another  has  overlooked.  Still  I  cannot  account 
for  the  number  and  nature  of  those  which  I  have  been 
able  to  produce  on  any  other  principle  than  the  veracity 
of  the  narrative  which  presents  them ; — accident  could  not 
have  touched  upon  truth  so  often — design  could  not  have 
touched  upon  it  so  artlessly  ;  the  less  so,  because  these  co- 
incidences do  not  discover  themselves  in  certain  detached 
and  isolated  passages,  but  break  out  from  time  to  time  as 
the  history  proceeds,  running  witnesses  (as  it  were)  to  the 

»  Josh.  xix.  9. 


100  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    I. 

accuracy  not  of  one  solitary  detail,  but  of  a  series  of  de- 
tails extending  through  the  lives  and  actions  of  many  dif- 
ferent individuals,  relating  to  many  different  events,  and 
dating  at  many  different  points  of  time.  For,  I  have  trav- 
elled through  the  writings  of  Moses,  beginning  from  the 
history  of  Abraham,  when  a  sojourner  in  the  land  of 
Canaan,  and  ending  with  a  transaction  which  happened 
on  the  borders  of  that  land,  when  the  descendants  of 
Abraham,  now  numerous  as  the  stars  in  heaven,  were 
about  to  enter  and  take  possession.  I  have  found  in  the 
progress  of  the  checkered  series  of  events,  the  marks  of 
truth  never  deserting  us — I  have' found  (to  recapitulate  as 
briefly  as  possible)  consistency  without  design  in  the 
many  hints  of  a  Patriarchal  Church  incidentally  scattered 
through  the  Book  of  Genesis  taken  as  a  whole — I  have 
found  it  in  particular  instances  ;  in  the  impassioned  terms 
wherein  the  Father  of  the  Faithful  intercedes  for  a  devoted 
city  of  which  his  brother's  son  was  an  inhabitant — in 
the  circumstance  of  his  own  son  receiving  in  marriage 
the  grand-daughter  of  his  brother,  a  singular  confirma- 
tion that  he  was  the  child  of  his  parent's  old  age,  the  mi- 
raculous offspring  of  a  sterile  bed — I  have  found  it  in  the 
several  oblique  intimations  of  the  imbecility  and  insig- 
nificance of  Bethuel — in  the  occurrence  of  Isaac's  medita- 
tion in  the  field,  with  the  fact  of  his  mother's  recent  death 
— and  in  the  desire  of  that  Patriarch  on  a  subsequent  oc- 
casion to  impart  the  blessing,  as  compared  with  what  seem 
to  be  symptoms  of  a  present  and  serious  sickness — I  have 
found  it  in  the  singular  command  of  Jacob  to  his  followers, 
to  put  away  their  idols,  as  compared  with  the  sacking  of 
an  idolatrous  city,  and  the  capture  of  its  idolatrous  in- 
habitants shortly  before — I  have  found  it  in  the  identity 
of  the  character  of  Jacob,  a  character  offered  to  us  in  many 
aspects  and  at  many  distant  intervals,  but  still  ever  the 


PART  I. 


BOOKS  OF  MOSES.  101 


same— I  have  found  it  in  the  lading  of  the  camels  of  the 
Ishmaelitish  merchants,' as  compared  with  the  mode  of 
sepulture  amongst  the  Egyptians— in  the  allusions  to  the 
corn-crop  of  Egypt,  thrown  out  in  such  a  variety  of  ways, 
and  so  inadvertently  in  all,  as  compared  one  with  another 
—I  have  found  it  in  the  proportion  of  that  crop  perma- 
nently assigned  to  Pharaoh,  as  compared  with  that  which 
was  taken  up  hy  Joseph  for  the  famine  ;  and  in  the  very 
natural  manner  in  which  a  great  revolution  of  the  state  is 
made  to  arise  out  of  a  temporary  emergency— 1  have  found 
'it  in  the  tenderness  with  which  the  property  of  the  priests 
was  treated,  as  compared  with  the  honor  in  which  they 
were  held  by  the  king,  and  the  alliance  which  had  been 
formed  with  one  of  their  families  by  the  minister  of  the 
king— I  have  found  it  in  the  character  of  Joseph,  which, 
however  and  whenever  we  catch  a  glimpse  of  it,  is  still 
one :  and  whether  it  be  gathered  from  his  own  words  or 
his  own  deeds,  from  the  language  of  his  father  or  from 
the  language  of  his  brethren,  is  still  uniform  throughout— 
I  have  found  it  in  the  death  of  Nadab  and  Abihu,  as  com- 
pared with  the  remarkable  law  which  follows  touching  the 
use  of  wine — and  in  the  removal  of  their  corpses  by  the 
sons  of  Uzziel,  as  compared  with  the  defilement  of  certain 
in  the  camp  about  the  same  time  by  the  dead  body  of  a 
man— I  have  found  it  in  the  gushing  of  water  from  the 
rock  at  Rephidim,  as  compared  with  the  attack  of. the 
Amalekites  which  followed— in  the  state  of  the  crops  in 
Judca  at  the  Passover,  as  compared  with  that  of  the 
crops  in  Egypt  at  the  plague  of  Hail — in  the  proportion 
of  oxen  and  waggons  assigned  to  the  several  families  of 
the  Levites,  as  compared  with  the  different  services  they 
had  respectively  to  discharge — I  have  found  it  in  the  order 
of  march  observed  in  one  particular  case,  when  the  Israel- 
ites broke  up  from  Mount  Sinai,  as  compared  with  the 

9* 


102  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    I. 

general  directions  given  in  other  places  for  pitching  the 
tents  and  sounding  the  alarms — I  have  found  it  in  the 
peculiar  propriety  of  the  grouping  of  the  conspirators 
against  Moses  and  Aaron,  as  compared  with  their  relative 
situations  in  the  camp — consisting,  as  they  do,  of  such  a 
family  of  the  Levites  and  such  a  -tribe  of  the  Israelites  as 
dwelt  on  the  same  side  of  the  Tabernacle,  and  therefore 
had  especial  facilities  for  clandestine  intercourse — I  have 
found  it  in  an  inference  from  the  direct  narrative,  that  the 
families  of  the  conspirators  did  not  perish  alike,  as  com- 
pared with  a  subsequent  most  casual  assertion,  that  though 
the  households  of  Dathan  and  Abiram  were  destroyed, 
the  children  of  Korath  died  not — I  have  found  it  in  the 
desire  expressed  conjointly  by  the  Tribe  of  Reuben  and 
the  Tribe  of  Gad  to  have  lands  allotted  them  together 
on  the  east  side  of  Jordan,  as  compared  with  their  contig- 
uous position  in  the  camp  during  their  long  and  trying 
march  through  the  wilderness — I  have  found  it  in  the  uni- 
formity with  which  Moses  implies  a  free  communication 
to  have  subsisted  amongst  the  scattered  inhabitants  of  the 
East — in  the  unexpected  discovery  of  Balaam  amongst 
the  dead  of  the  Midianites,  though  he  had  departed 
from  Moab  apparently  to  return  to  his  own  country,  as 
compared  with  the  united  embassy  that  was  sent  to  invite 
bim — and,  finally,  I  have  found  it  in  the  extraordinary 
diminution  of  the  Tribe  of  Simeon,  as  compared  with  the 
occasion  of  the  death  of  Zimri,  a  chief  of  that  tribe,  the 
only  individual  whom  Moses  thinks  it  necessary  to  name, 
and  the  victim  by  which  the  Plague  is  appeased. 

These  indications  of  truth  in. the  Mosaic  writings,  (to 
which,  as  I  have  said,  others  of  the  same  kind  might 
doubtless  be  added,)  may  be  sometimes  more,  sometimes 
less  strong ;  still  they  must  be  acknowledged,  I  think,  on 
a  general  review  and  when   taken  in  the   aggregate,  to 


PART    I.  BOOKS    OF    MOSES.  103 

amount  to  evidence  of  great  cumulative  weight — evidence 
the  more  valuable  in  the  present  instance,  because  the  ex- 
treme antiquity  of  the  documents  precludes  any  arising 
out  of  contemporary  history.  But  though  the  argument 
of  coincidence  without  design  is  the  only  one  with  which 
I  proposed  to  deal,  I  may  be  allowed,  in  closing  my  re- 
marks on  the  Books  of  Moses,  to  make  brief  mention  of  a 
few  other  points  in  favor  of  their  veracity,  which  have 
naturally  presented  themselves  to  my  mind  whilst  I  have 
been  engaged  in  investigating  that  argument — several  of 
these  also  bespeaking  undesignedness  in  the  narrative 
more  or  less,  and  so  far  allied  to  my  main  proposition — 
For  example — 

1.  There  is  a  minuteness  in  the  details  of  the  Mosaic 
writings,  which  argues  their  truth  ;  for  it  often  argues  the 
eye-witness,  as  in  the  adventures  of  the  wilderness  ;  and 
often  seems  intended  to  supply  directions  to  the  artificer, 
as  in  the  construction  of  the  Tabernacle. 

2.  There  are  touches  of  nature  in  the  narrative  which 
argue  its  truth,  for  it  is  not  easy  to  regard  them  otherwise 
than  as  strokes  from  the  life — as  where  "  the  mixed  mul- 
titude," whether  half-casts  or  Egyptians,  are  the  first  to 
sigh  for  the  cucumbers  and  melons  of  Egypt,  and  to 
spread  discontent  through  the  camp1 — as,  the  miserable 
exculpation  of  himself,  which  Aaron  attempts,  with  all  the 
cowardice  of  conscious  guilt— "I  cast  into  the  fire,  and 
there  came  out  this  calf :"  the  fire,  to  be  sure,  being  in  the 
fault.2 

3.  There  are  certain  little  inconveniences  represented 
as  turning  up  unexpectedly,  that  argue  truth  in  the  story ; 
for  they  are  just  such  accidents  as  are  characteristic  of  the 
working  of  a  new  system  and  untried  machinery.     What 

1  Numb.  xi.  4.  2  Exod.  xxxii.  24. 


104  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    I. 

is  to  be  done  with  the  man  who  is  found  gathering  sticks 
on  the  Sabbath-day1 — (could  an  impostor  have  devised 
such  a  trifle  ?)  How  the  inheritance  of  the  daughters  of 
Zelophehad  is  to  be  disposed  of,  there  being  no  heir-male.2 
Either  of  them  inconsiderable  matters  in  themselves,  but 
both  giving  occasion  to  very  important  laws;  the  one 
touching  life,  and  the  other  property. 

4.  There  is  a  simplicity  in  the  manner  of  Moses  when 
telling  his  tale,  which  argues  its  truth — no  parade  of  lan- 
guage, no  pomp  of  circumstance  even  in  his  miracles — a 
modesty  and  dignity  throughout  all.  Let  us  but  compare 
him  in  any  trying  scene  with  Josephus  ;  his  description, 
for  instance,  of  the  passage  through  the  Red  Sea,3  of  the 
murmuring  of  the  Israelites  and  the  supply  of  quails  and 
manna,  with  the  same  as  given  by  the  Jewish  historian, 
or  rhetorican,  we  might  rather  say — and  the  force  of  the 
observation  will  be  felt.4 

5.  There  is  a  candor  in  the  treatment  of  his  subject  by 
Moses,  which  argues  his  truth ;  as  when  he  tells  of  his 
own  want  of  eloquence,  which  unfitted  him  for  a  leader5 
— his  own  want  of  faith,  which  prevented  him  from  enter- 
ing the  promised  land6 — the  idolatry  of  Aaron  his  brother7 
— the  profaneness  of  Nadab  and  Abihu,  his  nephews8 — 
the  disaffection  and  punishment  of  Miriam,  his  sister.9 
The  relationship  which  Amram  his  father  bore  to  Joche- 
bed  his  mother,  which  became  afterwards  one  of  the 
prohibited  degrees  in  the  marriage  Tables  of  the  Levitical 
Law.10 

6.  There  is  a  disinterestedness  in  his  conduct,  which 

>  Numb.  xv.  32.  2  ib.  xxxvi.  2. 

3  Exod.  xiv.     Joseph.  Antiq.  b.  2.  c.  xvi. 

*  Ib.  xvi.     Joseph.  Antiq.  b.  3,  c.  i.        5  lb.  iv.  10.        «  Numb.  xx.  12. 

7  Exod.  xxxii.  21.  8  Lev.  x.  1.  9  Numb.  xii.  1. 

>°  Exod.  vi.  20.     Lev.  xxviii.  12. 


PART    I.  BOOKS    OF    MOSES.  105 

argues  him  to  be  a  man  of  truth  ;  for  though  he  had  sons, 
he  apparently  takes  no  measures  during  his  life  to  give 
them  offices  of  trust  or  profit;  and  at  his  death  he  appoints 
as  bis  successor  one  who  had  no  claims  upon  him,  either 
of  alliance,  of  clan-ship,  or  of  blood. 

7.  There  are  certain  prophetical  passages  in  the  writ- 
ings of  Moses,  which  argue  their  truth  ;  as  several  respect- 
ing the  future  Messiah  ;  and  the  very  sublime  and  literal 
one  respecting  the  final  fall  of  Jerusalem.' 

8.  There  is  a  simple  key  supplied  by  these  writings  to 
the  meaning  of  many  ancient  traditions  current  amongst 
the  heathens,  though  greatly  disguised,  which  is  another 
circumstance  that  agues  their  truth— as,  the  golden  age — 
the  garden  of  the  Hesperides— the  fruit  tree  in  the  midst 
of  the  garden  which  the  dragon  guarded— the  destruction 
of  mankind  by  a  flood,  all  except  two  persons,  and  those 
righteous  persons — 

"  Innocuos  ambos,  cultores  numinis  ambos:2" 

the  rainbow,  "  which  Jupiter  set  in  the  cloud,  a  sign  to 
men"3 — the  seventh  day  a  sacred  day4 — with  many  others  : 
all  conspiring  to  establish  the  reality  of  the  facts  which 
Moses  relates,  because  tending  to  show  that  vestiges  of  the 
like  present  themselves  in  the  traditional  history  of  the 
world  at  large. 

9.  The  concurrence  which  is  found  between  the  writ- 
ings of  Moses  and  those  of  the  New  Testament,  argues 
their  truth :  the  latter  constantly  appealing  to  them,  being 
indeed  but  the  completion  of  the  system  which  the  others 
are  the  first  to  put  forth.  Nor  is  this  an  illogical  argument 
—for,  though  the  credibility  of  the  New  Testament  itself 
may  certainly  be  reasoned  out  from  the  truth  of  the  Pen- 

i  Deut.  xxviii.  2  Ovid,  Met.  i.  327.  3  Horn.  II.  xi.  27,  28. 

«  Hesiod.  Oper.  et  D .  770.     See  Grot,  de  Verit.  Rel.  Christ.  1.  1,  xvi. 


106  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    I. 

tateuch  once  established,  it  is  still  very  far  from  depending 
on  that  circumstance  exclusively,  or  even  principally. 
The  New  Testament  demands  acceptance  on  its  own 
merits,  on  merits  distinct  from  those  on  which  the  Books 
of  Moses  rest — therefore  (so  far  as  it  does  so)  it  may  fairly 
give  its  suffrage  for  their  veracity — valeat  quantum  valet 
— and  surely  it  is  a  very  improbable  thing,  that  two  dis- 
pensations, separated  by  an  interval  of  some  fifteen  hun- 
dred years,  each  exhibiting  prophecies  of  its  own,  since 
fulfilled — each  asserting  miracles  of  its  own,  on  strong  evi- 
dence of  its  own — that  two  dispensations,  with  such  indi- 
vidual claims  to  be  believed,  should  also  be  found  to  stand 
in  the  closest  relation  to  one  another,  and  yet  both  turn  out 
impostures  after  all. 

10.  Above  all,  there  is  a  comparative  purity  in  the  theol- 
ogy and  morality  of  the  Pentateuch,  which  argues  not  only 
its  truth,  but  its  high  original ;  for  how  else  are  we  to  ac- 
count for  a  system  like  that  of  Moses,  in  such  an  age  and 
amongst  such  a  people ;  that  the  doctrine  of  the  unity,  the 
self-existence,  the  providence,  the  perfections  of  the  great 
God  of  heaven  and  earth,  should  thus  have  blazed  forth 
(how  far  more  brightly  than  even  in  the  vaunted  schools  of 
Athens  at  its  most  refined  era  !)  from  the  midst  of  a  na- 
tion, of  themselves  ever  plunging  into  gross  and  grovelling 
idolatry  ;  and  that  principles  of  social  duty,  of  benevo- 
lence, and  of  self-restraint,  extending  even  to  the  thoughts 
of  the  heart,1  should  have  been  the  produce  of  an  age, 
which  the  very  provisions  of  the  Levitical  Law  itself  show 
to  have  been  full  of  savage  and  licentious  abominations  ? 

Such  are  some  of  the  internal  evidences  for  the  veracity 
of  the  Books  of  Moses. 

11.  Then  the  situation  in  which  the  Jews  actually 

i  Exod.  xx.  3;  Deut.  vi.  4;  Exod.  Hi.  14;  Deut.  xi.  14;  Lev.  xix.  2; 
lb.  xix.  18 ;  Deut.  xxx.  6 ;  Exod.  xx.  17. 


PART  I.  BOOKS  OF  MOSES.  107 

found  themselves  placed,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  is  no  slight 
argument  for  the  truth  of  the  Mosaic  accounts;  reminded, 
as  they  were,  by  certain  memorials  observed  from  year  to 
year,  of  the  great  events  of  their  early  history,  just  as  they 
are  recorded  in  the  writings  of  Moses — memorials,  univer- 
sally recognized  both  in  their  object  and  in  their  authority. 
The  Passover,  for  instance,  celebrated  by  all — no  man 
doubting  its  meaning,  no  man  in  all  Israel  assigning  to  it 
any  other  origin  than  one,  viz.  that  of  being  a  contempo- 
rary monument  of  a  miracle  displayed  in  favor  of  the  peo- 
ple of  Israel :  by  right  of  which  credentials,  and  no  other, 
it  summoned  from  all  quarters  of  the  world,  at  great  cost, 
and  inconvenience,  and  danger,  the  dispersed  Jews — none 
disputing  the  obligation  to  obey  the  summons. 

12.  Then  the  heroic  devotion  with  which  the  Israelites 
continued  to  regard  the  Law,  even  long  after  they  had 
ceased  to  cultivate  the  better  part  of  it,  even  when  that 
very  Law  only  served  to  condemn  its  worshippers,  so  that 
they  would  offer  themselves  up  by  thousands,  with  their 
children  and  wives,  as  martyrs  to  the  honor  of  their  temple, 
in  which  no  image,  even  of  an  emperor,  who  could  scourge 
them  with  scorpions  for  their  disobedience,  should  be  suf- 
fered to  stand,  and  they  live1 — so  that  rather  than  violate 
the  sanctity  of  the  Sabbath  Day,  the  bravest  men  in  arms 
would  lay  down  their  lives  as  tamely  as  sheep,  and  allow 
themselves  to  be  burnt  in  the  holes  where  they  had  taken 
refuge  from  their  cruel  and  cowardly  pursuers.2  All  this 
points  to  their  Law,  as  having  been  at  first  promulgated 
under  circumstances  too  awful  to  be  forgotten  even  after 
the  lapse  of  ages. 

13.  Then  again,  the  extraordinary  degree  of  national 
pride  with  which  the  Jews  boasted  themselves  to  be  God's 

I  Joseph.  Bell.  Jud.  b.  2,  c.  10.  §  4.  2  Antiq.  Jud.  b.  12,  c.  6.  §  2. 


108  THE    VERACITY   OF    THE  PART    I. 

■peculiar  people,  as  if  no  nation  ever  was  or  ever  could  be 
so  nigh  to  Him ;  a  feeling  which  the  early  teachers  of 
Christianity  found  an  insuperable  obstacle  to  the  progress 
of  the  Gospel  amongst  them,  and  which  actually  did  effect 
its  ultimate  rejection — this  may  well  seem  to  be  founded 
upon  a  strong  traditional  sense  of  uncommon  tokens  of  the 
Almighty's  regard  for  them  above  all  other  nations  of  the 
earth,  which  they  had  heard  with  their  ears,  or  their 
fathers  had  declared  unto  them,  even  the  noble  works  that 
He  had  done  in  the  old  time  before  them. 

14.  Then  again,  the  constant  craving  after  "  a  sign," 
which  beset  them  in  the  latter  days  of  their  history,  as  a 
lively  certificate  of  the  prophet ;  and  not  after  a  sign  only, 
but  after  such  an  one  as  they  would  themselves  prescribe : 
"  What  sign  shewest  thou  that  we  may  see  and  believe  ?... 
our  fathers  did  eat  manna  in  the  desert  ;,n  this  desire,  so 
frequently  expressed,  and  with  which  they  are  so  fre- 
quently reproached,  looks  like  the  relic  of  an  appetite  en- 
gendered in  other  times,  when  they  had  enjoyed  the  privi- 
lege of  more  intimate  communion  with  God — it  seems  the 
wake,  as  it  were,  of  miracles  departed. 

15.  Lastly,  the  very  onerous  nature  of  the  Law — so 
studiously  meddling  with  all  the  occupations  of  life,  great 
and  small — this  yoke  would  scarcely  have  been  endured, 
without  the  strongest  assurance  on  the  part  of  those  who 
were  galled  by  it,  of  the  authority  by  which  it  was  im- 
posed. For  it  met  them  with  some  restraint  or  other  at 
every  turn.  Would  they  plough  ? — Then  it  must  not  be 
with  an  ox  and  an  ass.2  Would  they  sow  ? — Then 
must  not  the  seed  be  mixed.3  Would  they  reap? — Then 
must  they  not  reap  clean.4  Would  they  make  bread  ? — 
Then  must  they  set  apart  dough  enough  for  the  consecra 

i  John  vi.  31.  2  Deut.  xxii.  10.  3  lb.  9.  4  Lev.  xix.  9. 


PART    I.  BOOKS    OF    MOSES.  109 

ted  loaf.1  Did  they  find  a  bird's  nest? — Then  must  they 
let  the  old  bird  fly  away.2  Did  they  hunt? — Then  they 
must  shed  the  blood  of  their  game,  and  cover  it  with  dust.3 
Did  they  plant  a  fruit  tree? — For  three  years  was  the 
fruit  to  be  uncircumcised.4  Did  they  shave  their  beards  ? 
— They  were  not  to  cut  the  corners.5  Did  they  weave  a 
garment  ? — Then  must  it  be  only  with  threads  prescribed.6 
Did  they  build  a  house? — They  must  put  rails  and  bat- 
tlements q|i  the  roof.7  Did  they  buy  an  estate  ? — At  the 
year  of  Jubilee  back  it  must  go  to  its  owner.8  This  last 
in  itself  and  alone  a  provision  which  must  have  made  itself 
felt  in  the  whole  structure  of  the  Jewish  commonwealth, 
and  have  sensibly  affected  the  character  of  the  people  ; 
every  transfer  of  land  throughout  the  country  having  to 
be  regulated  in  its  price  according  to  the  remoteness  or 
proximity  of  the  year  of  release  ;  and  the  desire  of  accu- 
mulating a  species  of  property  usually  considered  the  most 
inviting  of  any,  counteracted  and  thwarted  at  every  turn. 
All  these  (and  how  many  more  of  the  same  kind  might 
be  named) !  are  enactments  which  it  must  have  required 
extraordinary  influence  in  the  Lawgiver  to  enjoin,  and 
extraordinary  reverence  for  his  powers  to  perpetuate. 

i  Numb.  xv.  20.  2  Deut.  xxii.  6.  3  Lev.  xvii.  13. 

»  lb.  xix.  23.  s  ib.  27.  "  lb.  19. 

1  Deut.  xxii.  8.  8  Lev.  xxv.  13. 


10 


THE   VERACITY 


HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES. 


PART  II 

Hitherto  I  have  endeavored  to  prove  the  veracity  of 
the  Mosaic  writings  by  the  instances  they  contain  of  coin- 
cidence without  design  in  their  several  parts  ;  and  I  hope 
and  believe  that  I  have  succeeded  in  pointing  out  such 
coincidences  as  might  come  of  truth,  and  could  come  of 
nothing  but  truth.  These  presented  themselves  in  the 
history  of  the  Patriarchs  from  Abraham  to  Joseph ;  and 
in  the  history  of  the  chosen  race  in  general,  from  their 
departure  out  of  Egypt  to  the  day  when  their  great  Law- 
giver expired  on  the  borders  of  that  land  of  Promise  into 
which  Joshua  was  now  to  lead  them — a  long  and  eventful 
history.  I  shall  now  resume  the  subject ;  pursue  the  ad- 
ventures of  this  extraordinary  people,  as  they  are  unfolded 
in  some  of  the  subsequent  books  of  holy  writ ;  and,  still 
using  the  same  test  as  before,  ascertain  whether  these  por- 
tions of  Scripture  do  not  appear  to  be  equally  trustworthy, 
and  whilst,  like  the  former,  they  assert,  often  without  any 
recourse  to  the  intervention  of  second  causes,  miracles 
many  and  mighty,  they  do  not  challenge  confidence  in 
those  miracles  by  marks  of  reality,  consistency,  and  accu- 


PART    II.         THE    HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  Ill 

racy,  which  the  ordinary  matters  of  fact  combined  with 
them  constantly  exhibit.  "  For  this  credibility  of  the  com- 
mon scripture  history,"  says  Bishop  Butler,  "  gives  some 
credibility  to  its  miraculous  history ;  especially  as  this  is 
interwoven  with  the  common,  so  as  that  they  imply  each 
other,  and  both  together  make  up  one  revelation."1 


I. 

Moses  then  being  dead,  Joshua  takes  the  command  of 
the  armies  of  Israel,  and  marches  them  over  Jordan  to  the 
possession  of  the  land  of  Canaan.  It  was  a  day  and  a 
deed  much  to  be  remembered.  "  It  came  to  pass,  when  the 
people  removed  from  their  tents  to  pass  over  Jordan,  and 
the  priests  bearing  the  ark  of  the  covenant  before  the  peo- 
ple ;  and  as  they  that  bare  the  ark  were  come  unto  Jordan, 
and  the  feet  of  the  priests  that  bare  the  ark  were  dipped 
in  the  brim  of  the  water,  (for  Jordan  overflowed!  all  his 
banks  in  the  time  of  harvest,)  that  the  waters  which  came 
down  from  above  stood  and  rose  up  upon  an  heap  very 
far  from  the  city  Adam,  that  is  beside  Zaretan :  and 
those  that  came  down  toward  the  sea  of  the  plain,  even 
the  salt  sea,  failed  and  were  cut  off:  and  the  people  passed 
over  right  against  Jericho.  And  the  priests  that  bare  the 
ark  of  the  covenant  of  the  Lord  stood  firm  on  the  dry 
ground  in  the  midst  of  Jordan,  and  all  the  Israelites  passed 
over  on  dry  ground,  until  all  the  people  were  passed  clean 
over  Jordan."2 

Such  is  the  language  of  the  Book  of  Joshua.  Now  in 
the  midst  of  this  miraculous  narrative,  an  incident  is  men- 
tioned, though  very  casually,  which  dates  the  season  of 

»  Analogy,  p.  389.  2  Josh.  iii.  14—17. 


112  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    II. 

the  year  when  this  passage  of  the  Jordan  was  effected. 
The  feet  of  the  priests,  it  seems,  were  dipped  in  the  brim 
of  the  water ;  and  this  is  explained  by  the  season  being 
that  of  the  periodical  inundation  of  Jordan,  that  river 
overflowing  his  banks  all  the  time  of  harvest.  The  bar- 
ley-harvest is  here  meant,  or  the  former  harvest,  as  it  is 
elsewhere  called,  in  contradistinction  to  the  wheat,  or  latter 
harvest ;  for  in  the  fourth  chapter  (v.  19)  we  read,  ::  the 
people  came  up  out  of  Jordan  on  the  tenth  day  of  the  first 
month,"  that  is,  four  days  before  the  Passover,  which  fell 
in  with  the  barley-harvest ;  the  wheat-harvest  not  being 
fully  completed  till  Pentecost,  or  fifty  days  later  in  the 
year,  when  the  wave-loaves  of  the  first-fruits  of  the  wheat 
were  offered  up.1  The  Israelites  passed  the  Jordan  then, 
it  appears,  at  the  time  of  bar  le  {/-harvest.  But  we  are  told 
in  Exodus  that  at  the  Plague  of  Hail,  which  was  but  a 
day  or  two  before  the  Passover.  ;;  the  flax  and  the  barley 
were  smitten,  for  the  barley  was  in  the  ear  and  the  flax 
was  boiled,  but  the  wheat  and  the  rye  were  not  smitten, 
for  they  were  not  grown  up."2  It  should  seem,  therefore, 
that  the  flax  and  the  barley  were  crops  which  ripened 
about  the  same  time  in  Egypt :  and  as  tire  climate  of  Ca- 
naan did  not  differ  materially  from  that  of  Egypt,  this,  no 
doubt,  was  the  case  in  Canaan  too ;  there  also  these  two 
crops  would  come  in  at  the  same  time.  The  Israelites, 
therefore,  who  crossed  the  Jordan,  as  we  have  seen  in  one 
passage,  at  the  harvest,  and  that  harvest,  as  we  have  seen 
in  another  passage,  the  barley-harvest,  must,  if  so,  have 
crossed  it  at  the^a.r-harvest. 

Now,  in  a  former  chapter,  we  are  informed,  that  three 
days  before  Joshua  ventured  upon  the   invasion,  he  sent 

1  This  question  of  the  harvests  is  examined  in  greater  detail  in  Part  I. 
No.  xvi. 

2  Exod.  ix.  31. 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  113 

two  men,  spies,  to  view  the  land,  even  Jericho.1  It  was  a 
service  of  peril :  they  were  received  by  Rahab,  a  woman 
of  that  city,  and  lodged  in  her  house  :  but  the  entrance  of 
these  strangers  at  night-fall  was  observed :  it  was  a  mo- 
ment, no  doubt,  of  great  suspicion  and  alarm  :  an  enemy's 
army  encamped  on  the  borders.  The  thing  was  reported 
to  the  King  of  Jericho,  and  search  was  made  for  the  men. 
Rahab,  however,  fearing  God — for  by  faith  she  felt  that 
the  miracles  wrought  by  him  in  favor  of  Israel  were  proofs 
that  for  Israel  he  fought,— by  faith,  which,  living  as  she 
did  in  the  midst  of  idolaters,  might  well  be  counted  to  her 
for  righteousness,  and  the  like  to  which,  in  a  somewhat 
similar  case,  was  declared  by  our  Lord,  enough  to  lead 
those  who  professed  it  into  the  kingdom  of  God,  even  be- 
fore the  chief  priests  and  elders  themselves2 — she,  I  say. 
having  this  faith  in  God,  and  true  to  those  laws  of  hospi- 
tality which  are  the  glory  of  the  eastern  nations,  and  more 
especially  of  the  females  of  the  East,  even  to  this  day.  at 
much  present  risk  protected  her  guests  from  their  pursuers. 
But  how!  "She  brought  them  up  to  the  roof  of  her 
house,  and  hid  them  with  the  stalks  of  flax1'3 — the  stalks 
of  flax,  no  doubt  just  cut  down,  which  she  had  spread  upon 
the  roof  of  her  house  to  steep  and  to  season. 

Here  I  see  truth.  Yet  how  very  minute  is  this  incident ! 
how  very  casually  does  it  present  itself  to  our  notice  !  how 
very  unimportant  a  matter  it  seems  in  the  first  instance, 
under  what  the  spies  were  hidden  !  enough  that,  whatever 
it  was,  it  answered  the  purpose,  and  saved  their  lives. 
Could  the  historian  have  contemplated  for  one  moment  the 
effect  which  a  trifle  about  a  flax-stalk  might  have  in  cor- 
roboration of  his  account  of  the  passage  of  the  Jordan  ? 
Is  it  possible  for  the  most  jealous  examiner  of  human  les- 

»  Josh.  i.  2;  ii.  1,  22;  ill.  2.  «  Heb.  xi.  31.     Matt.  xxi.  31. 

3  Josh.  ii.  6. 

10# 


114  THE    VERACITY   OF    THE  PART  II. 

timony  to  imagine  that  these  flax-stalks  were  fixed  upon 
above  all  things  in  the  world  for  the  covering  of  the  spies, 
because  they  were  known  to  be  ripe  with  the  barley,  and 
the  barley  was  known  to  be  ripe  at  the  Passover,  and  the 
Passover  was  known  to  be  the  season  when  the  Israelites 
set  foot  in  Canaan  ?  Or  rather,  would  he  not  fairly  and 
candidly  confess,  that  in  one  particular,  at  least,  of  this 
adventure,  (the  only  one  which  we  have  an  opportunity  of 
checking,)  a  religious  attention  to  truth  is  manifested  ;  and 
that  when  it  is  said,  "  the  feet  of  the  Priests  were  dipped 
in  the  brim  of  the  water,"  and  when  a  reason  is  assigned 
for  this  gradual  approach  to  the  bed  of  a  river,  of  which 
the  banks  were  in  general  steep  and  precipitous,  we  are 
put  in  possession  of  one  unquestionable  fact  at  least,  one 
particular  upon  which  we  may  safely  repose,  whatever  may 
be  said  of  the  remainder  of  the  narrative,  and  that  assur- 
edly truth  leads  us  by  the  hand  to  the  very  edge  of  the 
miracle,  if  not  through  the  miracle  itself? 


II. 


The  Israelites  having  made  this  successful  inroad  into 
the  land  of  Canaan,  divided  it  amongst  the  Tribes.  But 
the  Canaanites,  though  panic-struck  at  their  first  ap- 
proach, soon  began  to  take  heart,  and  the  covetous  policy 
of  Israel  (a  policy  which  dictated  attention  to  present  pe- 
cuniary profits,  no  matter  at  what  eventual  cost  to  the 
great  moral  interests  of  the  Commonwealth)  had  satisfied 
itself  with  making  them  tributaries,  contrary  to  the  com- 
mand of  God,  that  they  should  be  driven  out  ;l  and,  ac- 
cordingly, they  were  suffered,  as  it  was  promised,  to  be- 

1  Eiod.  xxiii.  31. 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  115 

come  thorns  in  Israel's  side,  always  vexing,  often  resisting, 
and  sometimes  oppressing  them  for  many  years  together. 
Meanwhile  the  Tribe  of  Dan  had  it»  lot  cast  near  the 
Amorites.  It  struggled  to  work  out  for  itself  a  settlement ; 
but  its  fierce  and  warlike  neighbors  drove  in  its  outposts, 
and  succeeded  in  confining  it  to  the  mountains.1  The 
children  of  Dan  became  straitened  in  their  borders,  and, 
unable  to  extend  them  at  home,  "  they  sent  of  their  fam- 
ily five  men  from  their  coasts,  men  of  valor,  to  spy  out 
the  land  and  to  search  it."  So  these  five  men  departed, 
and,  directing  their  steps  northwards,  to  the  nearest  parts 
of  the  country  which  held  out  any  prospect  to  settlers, 
"  they  came,"  we  are  told,  "  to  Laish,  and  saw  the  people 
that  were  therein,  how  they  dwelt  careless,  after  the  man- 
ner of  the  Zidonians,  quiet  and  secure,  and  there  was  no 
magistrate  in  the  land  that  might  put  them  to  shame  in 
anything,  and  they  were  far  from  the  Zldo?iians,  and 
had  no  business  with  any  man."2  Thus  the  circumstan- 
ces of  the  place  and  the  people  were  tempting  to  the  views 
of  the  strangers.  They  return  to  their  brethren,  and 
advise  an  attempt  upon  the  town.  Accordingly  they 
march  against  it,  take  it,  and,  rebuilding  the  city,  which 
was  destroyed  in  the  assault,  change  its  name  from  Laish 
to  Dan,  and  colonize  it.  From  this  it  should  appear  that 
Laish,  though  far  from  Sidon,  was  in  early  times  a  town 
belonging  to  Sidon,  and  probably  inhabited  by  Sidonians, 
for  it  was  after  their  manner  that  the  people  lived. 

Such  is  the  information  furnished  us  in  the  eighteenth 
chapter  of  the  Book  of  Judges. 

I  now  turn  to  the  third  chapter  of  the  Book  of  Deuter- 
onomy, and  I  there  find  the  following  passage  :  "  We  took 
at  that  time,"  says  Moses,  "out  of  the  hand  of  the  two 

1  Judges  i.  34.  2  lb.  xviii.  7. 


116  THE    VERACITY   OF    THE  PART    II. 

* 

kings  of  the  Amorites  the  land  that  was  on  this  side  Jor- 
dan, from  the  river  of  Anion  unto  Mount  Hermon — which 
Hermon  the  Sidonians  call  Sirion,  and  the  Amorites  call 
it  Shenir."1  But  why  this  mention  of  the  Sidonian  name 
of  this  famous  mountain  ?  It  was  not  near  to  Sidon — it 
does  not  appear  to  have  belonged  to  Sidon,  but  to  the  king 
of  Bashan.2  The  reason,  though  not  obvious,  is  neverthe- 
less discoverable,  and  a  very  curious  geographical  coinci- 
dence it  affords  between  the  former  passage  in  Judges  and 
this  in  Deuteronomy. 

For  Hermon,  we  know,  was  close  to  Caesarea  Philippi. 
But  Caesarea  Philippi,  we  are  again  informed,  was  the 
modern  name  of  Paneas,  the  seat  of  Jordan's  flood  :  and 
Paneas,  we  further  learn,  was  the  same  as  the  still  more 
ancient  Dan  or  Laish.3  Now  Laish,  we  have  seen,  was 
probably  at  first  a  settlement  of  the  Sidonians,  after  whose 
manner  the  people  of  Laish  lived.  Accordingly  it  appears 
— but  how  distant  and  unconnected  are  the  passages  from 
which  such  a  conclusion  is  drawn  ! — that  although  this 
Hermon  was  far  from  Sidon  itself,  still  at  its  foot  there 
was  dwelling  a  Sidonian  colony,  a  race  speaking  the  Si- 
donian language  ;  and,  therefore,  nothing  could  be  more 
natural  than  that  the  mountain  which  overhung  the  town 
should  have  a  Sidonian  name,  by  which  it  was  commonly 
known  in  those  parts,  and  that  this  should  suggest  itself, 
as  well  as  its  Hebrew  name,  to  Moses. 

1  Deut.  iii.  8,  9.  2  josh.  xii.  4,  5. 

3  "  Dan  Phoenices  oppidum.  quod  nunc  Paneas  dicitur.  Dan  autem 
unus  e  fontibus  est  Jordar.is." — Hieronym.  in  Quoestionibus  in  Genesin  t. 
p.  38'J.     It  was  also  Cffisarea  Philippi.— Euseb.  Eccl.     Hist.  vii.  c.  xvii. 

:  The  Hierusalem  Targum,  Numb.  xxxv.  writes  thus,  "  The  mountain  of 
Snow  at  Csesarea  (Philippi)— this  was  Hermon.' "— Lightfoot,  Vol.  ii.  p. 
62,  fol.     See  also  Psalm  xlii.  8. 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  117 


III 


Connected  with  the  circumstances  of  this  same  colony 
of  Laish  is  another  coincidence  which  1  have  to  offer,  and 
I  introduce  it  in  this  place,  because  it  is  so  connected,  for 
otherwise  it  anticipates  a  point  of  Jewish  history,  which, 
in  the  order  of  the  books  of  Scripture,  lies  a  long  way  be- 
fore me. '  The  construction  of  Solomon's  Temple  at  Jeru- 
salem is  the  event  at  which  it  dates. 

In  the  seventh  chapter  of  the  First  Book  of  Kings  I 
read,  "  And  king  Solomon  sent  and  fetched  Hiram  out  of 
Tyre.  He  was  a  widow's  son  of  the  Tribe  of  Naphtali, 
and  his  father  was  a  man  of  Tyre,  a  worker  in  brass  ; 
and  he  was  filled  with  wisdom  and  understanding,  and 
cunning  to  work  all  works  in  brass.  And  he  came  to 
king  Solomon,  and  wrought  all  his  work."  (v.  13.)  But 
in  the  parallel  passage  in  the  second  chapter  of  the  Second 
Book  of  Chronicles,  (v.  13),  where  we  have  the  answer 
which  king  Hiram  returned  to  Solomon,  when  the  latter 
desired  him  to  "  send  him  a  man,  cunning  to  work  in 
gold,  and  in  silver,  and  in  brass  ;"  I  find  it  running  thus  : 
— u  Now  I  have  sent  a  cunning  man,  endued  with  under- 
standing, of  Huram  my  father's,  (or  perhaps  Huram-Abi 
by  name,)  the  son  of  a  woman  of  the  daughters  of  Dan, 
and  his  father  was  a  man  of  Tyre,  skilful  to  work  in  gold.'' 
It  is  evident,  that  the  same  individual  is  meant  in  both 
passages ;  yet  there  is  an  apparent  discrepancy  between 
them  :  the  one  in  Kings  asserting  his  mother  to  be  a  wo- 
man of  the  Tribe  of  Naphtali ;  the  other,  in  Chronicles, 
asserting  her  to  be  a  woman  of  the  daughters  of  Dan. 
The  difficulty  has  driven  the  critics  to  some  intricate  ex- 
pedients, in  order  to  resolve  it.  "  She  herself  was  of  the 
Tribe  of  Dan,"  says  Dr.  Patrick  ;    «  but  her  first  husband 


118  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART  II. 

was  of  the  Tribe  of  Naphtali,  by  whom  she  had  this  son. 
When  she  was  a  widow,  she  married  a  man  of  Tyre,  who 
is  called  Hiram's  father,  because  he  bred  him  up,  and  was 
the  husband  of  his  mother."  All  this  is  gratuitous.  The 
explanation  only  serves  to  show  that  the  interpreter  was 
aware  of  the  knot,  but  not  of  the  solution.  This  difficulty, 
however,  like  many  others  in  Scripture,  when  once  ex- 
plained, helps  to  confirm  its  truth.  We  have  seen  in  the 
last  paragraph,  that  six  hundred  Danites  emigrated  from 
their  own  Tribe,  and  seized  upon  Laish,  a  city  of  the  Si- 
donians.  Now  the  Sidonians  were  subjects  of  the  king  of 
Tyre,  and  were  the  selfsame  people  as  the  Tyrians  ;  for 
in  the  fifth  chapter  of  the  First  Book  of  Kings,  where  Sol- 
omon is  reported  of  sending  to  the  king  of  Tyre  for  work- 
men, he  is  said  to  assign  as  a  reason  for  the  application, 
';  Thou  knowest  that  there  is  not  among  us  any  that  can 
skill  to  hew  timber  like  unto  the  Sidonians"  (v.  6.) 
The  Tyrians,  therefore,  and  the  Sidonians  were  the  same 
nation.  But  Laish  or  Dan,  we  found,  was  near  the 
springs  of  Jordan;  and  therefore,  since  the  "outgoings" 
of  the  territory  of  Naphtali  are  expressly  said  to  have  been 
at  Jordan,  there  is  good  reason  to  believe  that  Laish  or 
Dan  stood  in  the  Tribe  of  Naphtali.  But  if  so,  then  is 
the  difficulty  solved  ;  for  the  woman  was,  by  abode,  of 
Naphtali ;  Laish,  where  she  dwelt,  being  situated  in 
that  Tribe,  as  Jacob  is  called  a  Syrian,  from  his  having 
lived  in  Syria;1  and  by  birth,  she  was  of  Dan,  being 
come  of  that  little  colony  of  Danites,  which  the  parent 
stock  had  sent  forth  in  early  times  to  settle  at  a  distance. 
Meanwhile,  the  very  circumstance  which  interposes  to 
reconcile  the  apparent  disagreement,  accounts  no  less  nat- 
urally for  the  fact,  that  she  had  a  Tyrian  for  her  husband. 

1  Deut.  xxvL  5. 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  119 

Now  upon  what  a  very  trifle  does  this  mark  of  truth 
turn  !  Who  can  suspect  anything  insidious  here  ?  any 
trap  for  the  unwary  inquisitor  after  internal  evidence  in 
the  domestic  circumstances  of  a  master-smith,  employed  by 
Solomon  to  build  his  temple  ? 

I  am  glad  to  have  it  in  my  power  to  produce  this  geo- 
graphical coincidence,  because  it  is  rare  in  its  kind — the 
geography  of  Canaan,  owing  to  its  extreme  perplexity, 
scarcely  furnishing  its  due  contingent  to  the  argument  I 
am  handling.  However,  that  very  intricacy  may  in  itself 
be  though  to  say  something  to  our  present  purpose  ;  aris- 
ing, as  it  in  a  great  degree  does,  out  of  the  manifold  in- 
stances in  which  different  places  are  called  by  the  same 
name  in  the  Holy  Land.  Now  whilst  this  accident  creates 
a  confusion,  very  unfavorable  to  determining  their  respec- 
tive sites,  and  consequently  stands  in  the  way  of  such  un- 
designed tokens  of  truth  as  might  spring  out  of  a  more 
accurate  knowledge  of  such  particulars  ;  still  it  accords  very 
singularly  with  the  circumstances  under  which  Scripture 
reports  the  land  of  Canaan  to  have  been  occupied  : — I 
mean,  that  it  was  divided  amongst  Twelve  Tribes  of  one 
and  the  same  nation  ;  each,  therefore,  left  to  regulate  the 
names  within  its  own  borders  after  its  own  pleasure;  and 
all  having  many  associations  in  common,  which  would 
often  over-rule  them,  no  doubt,  however  unintentionally, 
to  fix  upon  the  same.  We  have  only  to  look  to  our  own 
colonies,  in  whatever  latitude  dispersed,  to  see  the  like 
workings  of  the  same  natural  feeling  familiarly  exemplified 
in  the  identity  of  local  names,  which  they  severally  present. 
And  it  may  be  added,  that  such  a  geographical  nomencla- 
ture was  the  more  likely  to  establish  itself  in  the  new 
settlements  of  the  Israelites,  amongst  whom  names  of 
places,  from  the  earliest  times  downwards,  seem  to  have 
been  seldom,  if  ever,  arbitrary,  but  still  to  have  carried 


120  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    II. 

with   them   some   meaning,  which   was,   or   which   was 
thought  to  be,  significant. 


IV. 

I  HAVE  said  that  the  Oanaanites,  who  were  spared  by 
(he  Israelites  after  (lie  first  encounter  with  them,  partly 
that  they  might  derive  from  (he  conquered  race  a  tribute, 
and  partly  that  they  might  employ  them  in  (he  servile 
offices  of  hewing  wood  and  drawing  water,  by  degrees 
recovered  their  spirit,  urged  war  successfully  against  their 
invaders,  and  for  many  ve;irs  mightily  oppressed  Israel. 
The  Philistines,  the  most  formidable  of  the  inhabitants  of 
Canaan,  and  those  under  whom  die  Israelites  suffered  the 
most  severely,  added  policy  to  power.  For  at  their  bidding 
it  came  to  pass,  (and  probably  the  precaution  was  adopted 
by  others  besides  the  Philistines,)  that  "there  was  no 
smith  found  throughout  all  the  land  of  Israel  ;  for  the 
Philistines  said,  Lest  the  Hebrews  make  themselves  swords 
and  spears.  Put  all  tin-  Israelites  went  down  to  the  Phil- 
istines, to  sharpen  every  man  his  share,  and  his  coulter, 
and  his  axe,  and  his  mattock."1  Such  is  said  to  have 
been  the  rigorous  law  of  the  conquerors.  The  workers  in 
iron  were  everywhere  put  down,  lest,  under  pretence  of 
making  implements  for  the  husbandman,  they  should 
forge  arms  for  the  rebel.  Now  that  some  such  law  was 
actually  in  force.  (1  am  not  aware  that  direct,  mention  is 
made  of  it  except  in  this  one  passage,)  is  a  fact  confirmed 
by  a  great  many  incidents,  some  of  them  very  trilling  and 
inconsiderable,  none  of  them  related  or  connected,  but  all 
of  them  turned  by  this  one  key. 

>  1  Sam.  xiii.  19. 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  121 

Thug,  when  Ehud  prepared  to  dispatch  Eglon  the  king 
of  Moab,  to  whom  the  Israelites  were  then  subject,  "he 
made  him"  (we  are  told)  "a  dagger,  which  had  two  edges, 
of  a  cubit  length,  and  he  did  gird  it  under  his  raiment 
upon  hi-  right  thigh?1  lie  made  it  himself,  it  seems,  ex- 
pressly  for  the  occasion,  and  lie  bound  it  upon  his  right 
thigh,    instead   of  bis   left,   which  was   the   BWOfd-side,    to 

baflle  suspicion;  whilst,  being  left-handed,  be  could  wield 
it  nevertheless.  Moreover  it  may  be  observed  in  passing, 
that  Ehud  was  a  Benjamite  ;2  and  that  of  the  Benjamites, 
when  their  fighting  men  turned  out  against  Israel  in  the 
affair  of  fjJibeah,  there  were  seven  hundred  choice  slingem 
left-handed?  and  that  of  this  discomfited  army,  sis  hun- 
dred persons  c  caped  to  the  rock  Ilimmon,  none  so  likely 
as  the  light  armed  ;  and  that  this  escape  i  dated  by  owe 
of  our  most  careful  investigators  of  Scripture,  Dr.  Light  foot, 
at  thirteen  years  before  Ehud's  accession.4  What  then  is 
more  probable, — yet  I  need  not  Bay  bow  incidental  is  this 
touch  of  truth,— than  that  ibis  left-handed  Ehud,  a  Ben- 
jamite, was  one  win)  survived  of  the  hundred  left- 
banded  slingers,  who  were  Benjamites? 

Thus  again,  Shamgar  slays  six  hundred  of  the  Philis- 
tines with  an  ox-goad?  doubtless  having  recourse  to  an 
implement  bo  inconvenient,  because  it  was  not  permitted 
to  carry  arms  or  to  have  them  in  possession. 

Thus  Samson,  when  he  went  down  to Timnath,  with 
no  very  friendly  feeling  towards  the  Philistines,  however 
he  might  feign  it.  nor  at  a  moment  of  great  political  tran- 
quillity, was  Btill  unarmed  ;  so  that  when  t:  the  young  lion 
roared  against  hhn.  he  rent  him.  as  he  would  have  rent  a 

'  Jud-rrs  iii.  16,  2  ibid.  iii.  15.  3  n,i,].  xx.  16. 

«  Li^'litloot's  Works,  i.  44—47.  6  Judges  iii.  31. 

11 


122  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    II. 

kid,  and  he  had  nothing  in  his  hand."1  And  when  the 
same  champion  slew  a  thousand  of  the  Philistines,  it  was 
with  a  jaw-bone,  for  he  had  no  other  choice.  "  Was  there 
a  shield  or  spear  seen  among  forty  thousand  in  Israel  ?"2 

All  these  are  indications,  yet  very  oblique  ones,  that  no 
smith  or  armorer  wrought  throughout  all  the  land  of 
Israel ;  for  it  will  be  perceived,  on  examination,  that  every 
one  of  these  incidents  occurred  at  times  when  the  Israel- 
ites were  under  subjection. 

Moreover,  it  was  probably  in  consequence  of  this  same 
restrictive  law,  that  the  sling  became  so  popular  a  wea- 
pon amongst  the  Israelites.  It  does  not  appear  that  it  was 
known,  or  at  least  used,  under  Moses.  Whilst  Israel  was 
triumphant,  it  was  not  needed  :  in  those  happier  days,  her 
fighting-men  were  men  that  "  drew  the  sword."  In  the 
days  of  her  oppression  they  were  driven  to  the  use  of  more 
ignoble  arms.  The  sling  was  readily  constructed,  and 
readily  concealed.  Whilst  a  staff  or  hempken-stalk  grew 
in  her  fields,  and  a  smooth  stone  lay  in  her  brooks,  this 
artillery  at  least  was  ever  forthcoming.  It  was  not  a  very 
fatal  weapon,  unless  wielded  with  consummate  skill.  The 
Philistines  despised  it :  Goliath,  we  may  remember,  scorns 
it  as  a  weapon  against  a  dog :  but  by  continual  applica- 
tion to  the  exercise  of  it,  (for  it  was  now  their  only  hope.) 
the  Israelites  converted  a  rude  and  rustic  plaything  into  a 
formidable  engine  of  war.  That  troop  of  Benjamites, 
of  whom  I  have  already  spoken,  had  taken  pains  to  make 
themselves  equally  expert  with  either  hand — (every  one 
could  sling  stones  at  an  hairbreadth,  and  not  miss) — and 
the  precision  with  which  David  directed  it,  would  not  per- 
haps be  thought  extraordinary  amongst  the  active  and 
practised  youths  of  his  day.  » 

1  Judges  xiv.  5,  6.  2  ibid.  v.  8. 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  123 

These  particulars,  it  will  be  perceived,  are  many  and 
divers ;  and  though  they  might  not  of  themselves  have 
enabled  us  to  draw  them  into  an  induction  that  the  inhabi- 
tants of  Canaan  withheld  from  Israel  the  use  of  arms  ; 
yet,  when  we  are  put  in  possession  of  the  single  fact,  that 
no  smith  was  allowed  throughout  all  Israel,  we  are  at  once 
supplied  with  the  centre  towards  which  they  are  one  and 
all  perceived  to  converge. 

I  know  not  how  incidents  of  the  kind  here  produced  can 
be  accounted  for,  except  by  the  supposition  that  they  are 
portions  of  a  true  and  actual  history;  and  they  who  may 
feel  that  there  is  in  them  some  force,  but  who  may  at  the 
same  time  feel  that  fuller  evidence  is  wanted  to  compel 
their  assent  to  a  Scripture  which  makes  upon  them  de- 
mands so  large  ;  who  secretly  whisper  to  themselves,  in 
the  temper  of  the  incredulous  JewT  of  old,  "  We  would  see 
a  sign  ;"  or  of  him  who  mocked,  saying,  "Let  Him  now 
come  down  from  the  cross,  and  we  will  believe" — let  such 
calmly  and  dispassionately  consider,  that  there  could  be  no 
room  for  faith,  if  there  were  no  room  for  doubt ;  that  the 
scheme  of  our  probation  requires,  perhaps  as  a  matter  of 
necessity,  that  faith  should  be  in  it  a  very  chief  ingredi- 
ent ;  that  the  exercise  of  faith,  (as  we  may  partly  perceive,) 
both  the  spirit  which  must  foster  it,  and  the  spirit  which 
must  issue  from  it,  is  precisely  what  seems  fit  for  mould- 
ing us  into  vessels  for  future  honor ;  that  natural  religion 
lifts  up  its  voice  to  tell  us,  that  in  this  world  we  are  un- 
doubtedly living  under  the  dispensation  of  a  God,  who  has 
given  us  probability,  and  not  demonstration,  for  the  prin- 
ciple of  our  ordinary  guidance  ;  and  that  he  may  be  there- 
fore well  disposed  to  proceed  under  a  similar  dispensation, 
with  regard  to  the  next  world,  trying  thereby  who  is  the 
"  wise  servant" — who  is  reasonable  in  his  demands  for  evi- 
dence, for  such  he  rejects  not ;  and  who  is  presumptuous, 


124  THE    VERACITY    OF   THE  PART    II. 

for  such  he  still  farther  hardens, — saying  to  the  one  with 
complacency  and  satisfaction;  "  Because  I  said  unto  thee, 
I  saw  thee  under  the  fig-tree,  believest  thou  ?  Thou  shalt 
see  greater  things  than  these."1  And  to  the  other,  in  sor- 
row and  rebuke,  "  Because  thou  hast  seen  me,  thou  hast 
believed  ;  blessed  are  they  that  have  not  seen,  and  yet  have 
believed."8 


V. 


It  is  most  satisfactory  to  find,  as  the  history  of  the  Israel- 
ites unfolds  itself,  the  same  indications  of  truth  and  accu- 
racy still  continuing  to  present  themselves — the  same  sig- 
natures (as  it  were)  of  a  subscribing  witness  of  credit, 
impressed  on  every  sheet  as  we  turn  it  over  in  its  order. 
The  glory  of  Israel  is  now  brought  before  us :  David  comes 
upon  the  scene,  destined  to  fill  the  most  conspicuous  place 
in  the  annals  of  his  country,  and  furnishing,  in  the  details 
of  his  long  and  eventful  life,  a  series  of  arguments  such 
as  we  are  in  search  of,  decisive,  I  think,  of  the  reality  of 
his  story,  and  of  the  fidelity  with  which  it  is  told.  With 
these  I  shall  be  now  for  some  time  engaged. 

The  circumstances  under  which  he  first  appears  be- 
fore us,  are  such  as  give  token  at  once  of  his  intrepid  char- 
acter, and  trust  in  God.  "  And  there  went  out  a  champion," 
(so  we  read  in  the  seventeenth  chapter  of  the  First  Book 
of  Samuel,)  "out  of  the  camp  of  the  Philistines,  Goliath 
of  Gath,  whose  height  was  six  cubits  and  a  span."  The 
point  upon  which  the  argument  for  the  veracity  of  the  his- 
tory which  ensues  will  turn,  is  the  incidental  mention 
here  made  of  Gath,  as  the  city  of  Goliath,  a  patronymic 

i  John  i.  50.  2  ibid  xx.  29. 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  125 

which  might  have  been  thought  of  very  little  importance, 
either  in  its  insertion  or  omission  ;  here,  however,  it  stands. 
Goliath  of  Gath  was  David's  gigantic  antagonist.  Now  let 
us  mark  the  value  of  this  casual  designation  of  the  formi- 
dable Philistine.  The  report  of  the  spies  whom  Moses  sent 
into  Canaan,  as  given  in  the  thirteenth  chapter  of  the  Book 
of  Numbers,  was  as  follows: — "  The  land  through  which  we 
have  gone  to  search  it,  is  a  land  that  eateth  up  the  inhab- 
itants thereof;  and  all  the  people  that  we  saw  in  it  were 
men  of  a  great  stature.  And  there  we  saw  the  giants, 
the  sons  of  Anak.  which  came  of  the  giants.  And  we 
were  in  our  own  sight  as  grasshoppers,  and  so  we  were  in 
their  sight."1  Moses  is  here  a  testimony  unto  us,  that  these 
Anakims  were  a  race  of  extraordinary  stature.  This  fact 
let  us  bear  in  mind,  and  now  turn  to  the  Book  of  Joshua. 
There  it  is  recorded  amongst  the  feats  of  arms  of  that  val- 
iant leader  of  Israel,  whereby  he  achieved  the  conquest  of 
Canaan,  that  "  He  cut  off  the  Anakims  from  the  moun- 
tains, from  Hebron,  from  Debir,  from  Anab,  and  from  the 
mountains  of  Judah,  and  from  all  the  mountains  of  Israel : 
Joshua  destroyed  them  utterly,  with  their  cities.  There 
was  none  of  the  Anakims  left  in  the  land  of  the  children  of 
Israel,  only"  (observe  the  exception)  "  in  Gaza,  in  Gath, 
and  in  Ashdod,  there  remained."2  Here,  in  his  turn, 
comes  in  Joshua  as  a  witness,  that  when  he  put  the  Ana- 
kims to  the  sword,  he  left  some  remaining  in  three  cities, 
and  in  no  others  ;  and  one  of  these  three  cities  was  Gath. 
Accordingly,  when  in  the  Book  of  Samuel  we  find  Gath 
most  incidentally  named  as  the  country  of  Goliath,  the  fact 
squares  very  singularly  with  those  two  other  independent 
facts,  brought  together  from  two  independent  authorities — 
the  Books  of  Moses  and  Joshua — the  one,  that  the  Ana- 

>  Numb.  xiii.  32,  33.  2  Josh.  xi.  21.  22. 

11* 


126  THE    VERACITY   OF    THE  PART    II. 

kirns  were  persons  of  gigantic  size ;  the  other,  that  some 
of  this  nearly  exterminated  race,  who  survived  the  sword 
of  Joshua,  did  actually  continue  to  dwell  at  Gath.  Thus 
in  the  mouth  of  three  witnesses — Moses,  Joshua,  and 
Samuel,  is  the  word  established  ;  concurring  as  they  do,  in 
a  manner  the  most  artless  and  satisfactory,  to  confirm  one 
particular  at  least  in  this  singular  exploit  of  David.  One 
particular,  and  that  a  hinge  upon  which  the  whole  moves, 
is  discovered  to  be  matter  of  fact  beyond  all  question  ;  and 
therefore,  in  the  absence  of  all  evidence  whatever  to  the 
contrary,  I  am  disposed  to  believe  the  other  particulars  of 
the  same  history  to  be  matter  of  fact  too.  Yet  there  are 
many,  I  will  not  say  miraculous,  but  certainly  most  provi- 
dential circumstances  involved  in  it ;  circumstances  argu- 
ing, and  meant  to  argue,  the  invisible  hand  by  which 
David  fought,  and  Goliath  fell.  The  stripling  from  the 
sheepfold  withstanding  the  man  of  war  from  his  youth — 
the  ruddy  boy,  his  carriage  and  his  cheeses  left  for  the 
moment,  hearing  and  rejoicing  both  to  hear  and  accept 
the  challenge,  which  struck  terror  into  the  veterans  of 
Israel — the  shepherd's  bag,  with  five  smooth  stones,  and  no 
more,  (such  assurance  did  he  feel  of  speedy  success,)  op- 
posed to  the  helmet  of  brass,  and  the  coat  of  brazen  mail, 
and  the  greaves  of  brass,  and  the  gorget  of  brass,  and  the 
shield  borne  before  him,  and  the  spear  with  the  staff  like  a 
weaver's  beam — the  first  sling  of  a  pebble,  the  signal  of 
panic  and  overthrow  to  the  whole  host  of  the  Philistines — 
all  this  claims  the  character  of  more  than  an  ordinary 
event,  and  asserts,  (as  David  declared  it  to  do,)  that  "  The 
Lord  saveth  not  with  sword  and  spear  ;  but  that  the  bat- 
tle is  the  Lord's,  and  that  he  gave  it  into  Israel's  hands."1 

1  1  Sam.  xvii.  47. 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  127 


VI. 

I  proceed  with  the  exploits  of  David  :  for  though  the 
coincidences  themselves  are  distinct,  they  make  up  a  story 
which  is  almost  continuous.  David,  we  are  told,  had  now 
won  the  hearts  of  all  Israel.  The  daughters  of  the  land 
sung  his  praises  in  the  dance,  and  their  words  awoke  the 
jealousy  of  Saul.  "Saul  had  slain  his  thousands — David 
his  ten  thousands."  Accordingly  the  king,  forgetful  of  his 
obligations  to  the  gallant  deliverer  of  his  country  from  the 
yoke  of  the  Philistines,  and  regardless  of  the  claims  of  the 
husband  of  his  daughter,  sought  his  life.  Twice  he  at- 
tacked him  with  a  javelin  as  he  played  before  him  in  his 
chamber :  he  laid  an  ambuscade  about  his  house  :  he  pur- 
sued him  with  bands  of  armed  men  as  he  fled  for  his  life 
amongst  the  mountains.  David,  however,  had  less  fear  for 
himself  than  for  his  kindred, — for  himself  he  could  pro- 
vide— his  conscience  was  clear,  his  courage  good,  the  hearts 
of  his  countrymen  were  with  him,  and  God  was  on  his 
side.  But  his  name  might  bring  evil  on  his  house,  and 
the  safety  of  his  farents  was  his  first  care.  How  then  did 
he  secure  it  ?  "  And  David,"  we  read,  "  went  thence  to 
Mizpeh  of  Moab,  and  he  said  unto  the  king  of  Moab, 
Let  my  father  and  my  mother,  I  pray  thee,  come  forth, 
and  be  with  you  till  I  know  what  God  will  do  for  me. 
And  he  brought  them  before  the  king  of  Moab  ;  and  they 
dwelt  with  him  all  the  time  that  David  continued  in  the 
hold."1 

Now  why  should  David  be  disposed  to  trust  his  father 
and  mother  to  the  protection  of  the  Moabites  above  all 
others?     Saul,  it  is  true,  had  been  at  war  with  them,2 

i  I  Sam.  xxii.  3,  4.  s  Ibid.  xiv.  47. 


128  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    II. 

whatever  he  might  then  be, — but  so  had  he  been  with 
every  people  round  about ;  with  the  Ammonites,  with  the 
Edomites,  with  the  kings  of  Zobah.  Neither  did  it  fol- 
low that  the  enemies  of  Saul,  as  a  matter  of  course,  would 
be  the  friends  of  David.  On  the  contrary,  he  was  only  re- 
garded by  the  ancient  inhabitants  of  the  land,  to  which- 
ever of  the  local  nations  they  belonged,  as  the  champion  of 
Israel ;  and  with  such  suspicion  was  he  received  amongst 
them,  notwithstanding  Saul's  known  enmity  towards  him, 
that  before  Achish  king  of  Gath  he  was  constrained  to 
feign  himself  mad,  and  so  effect  his  escape.  And  though 
he  afterwards  succeeded  in  removing  the  scruples  of  tbat 
prince,  and  obtained  his  confidence,  and  dwelt  in  his  land, 
yet  the  princes  of  the  Philistines,  in  general,  continued  to 
put  no  trust  in  him ;  and  when  it  was  proposed  by  Achish, 
that  he,  with  his  men,  should  go  up  with  the  armies  of  the 
Philistines  against  Israel, — and  when  he  had  actually 
joined, — "  the  princes  of  the  Philistines  said  unto  him, 
Make  this  fellow  return,  that  he  may  go  to  the  place  which 
thou  hast  appointed  him  ;  and  let  him  not  go  down  with 
us  to  battle,  lest  in  the  battle  he  be  an  adversary  to  us : 
for  wherewith  should  he  reconcile  himself  unto  his  master? 
should  it  not  be  with  the  heads  of  these  men  ?'" 

Whether,  indeed,  the  Moabites  proved  themselves  to  be 
less  suspicious  of  David  than  these,  his  other  idolatrous 
neighbors,  does  not  appear ;  nor  whether  their  subsequent 
conduct  warranted  the  trust  which  he  was  now  compelled 
to  repose  in  them.  Tradition  says,  that  they  betrayed  it, 
and  slew  his  parents ;  and  certain  it  is,  that  David,  some 
twenty  years  afterwards,  proceeded  against  them  with  sig- 
nal severity  ;  for  "  he  smote  Moab,  and  measured  them 
with  a  line,  casting  them  down  to  the  ground ;  even  with 

1  1  Sam.  xxix.  4. 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.        ,  129 

two  lines  measured  he  to  put  to  death,  and  with  one  full 
line  to  keep  alive."1  Something,  therefore,  had  occurred  in 
the  interval  to  excite  his  heavy  displeasure  against  them  : 
and  if  the  punishment  seems  to  have  tarried  too  long  to 
be  consistent  with  so  remote  a  cause  of  offence,  it  must  be 
remembered  that  for  fourteen  of  those  years  the  throne  of 
David  was  not  established  amongst  the  Ten  Tribes ;  and 
that,  amidst  the  domestic  disorders  of  a  new  reign,  leisure 
and  opportunity  for  taking  earlier  vengeance  upon  this 
neighboring  kingdom  might  well  be  wanting.  But  how- 
ever this  might  be,  in  Moab  David  sought  sanctuary  for 
his  father  and  mother  ;  perilous  this  decision  might  be, — 
probably  it  turned  out  so  in  fact, — but  he  was  in  a  great 
strait,  and  thought  that,  in  a  choice  of  evils,  this  was  the 
least. 

Now  what  principle  of  preference  may  be  imagined  to 
have  governed  David  when  he  committed  his  family  to  the 
dangerous  keeping  of  the  Moabites  1  Was  it  a  mere  mat- 
ter of  chance  ?  It  might  seem  so,  as  far  as  appears  to  the 
contrary  in  David's  history,  given  in  the  Books  of  Samuel ; 
and  if  the  Book  of  Ruth  had  never  come  down  to  us,  to 
accident  it  probably  would  have  been  ascribed.  But  this 
short  and  beautiful  historical  document  shows  us  a  pro- 
priety in  the  selection  of  Moab  above  any  other  for  a  place 
of  refuge  to  the  father  and  mother  of  David  ;  since  it  is 
there  seen  that  the  grandmother  of  Jesse,  David's  father, 
was  actually  a  Moabitess ;  Ruth  being  the  mother  of 
Obed,  and  Obed  the  father  of  Jesse.2  And,  moreover,  that 
Orpah,  the  other  Moabitess,  who  married  Mahlon  at  the 
time  when  Ruth  married  Chilion  his  brother,  remained  be- 
hind in  Moab  after  the  departure  of  Naomi  and  Ruth,  and 
remained  behind  with  a  strong  feeling  of  affection,  never- 

>  2  Sam.  vui.  2.  s  Ruth  iv.  17. 


130 


THE    VERACITY    OF   THE  PART    II. 


theless,  for  the  family  and  kindred  of  her  deceased  hus- 
band, taking  leave  of  them  with  tears.1  She  herself  then, 
or,  at  all  events,  her  descendants  and  friends,  might  still 
be  alive.  Some  regard  for  the  posterity  of  Ruth,  David 
would  persuade  himself,  might  still  survive  amongst  them. 
An  interval  of  fifty  years,  for  it  probably  was  not  more, 
was  not  likely,  he  might  think,  to  have  worn  out  the 
memory  and  the  feelings  of  the  relationship,  in  a  country 
and  at  a  period  which  acknowledged  the  ties  of  family  to 
be  long  and  strong,  and  the  blood  to  be  the  life  thereof. 

Thus  do  we  detect,  not  without  some  pains,  a  certain 
fitness  in  the  conduct  of  David  in  this  transaction,  which 
marks  it  to  be  a  real  one.  The  forger  of  a  story  could  not 
have  fallen  upon  the  happy  device  of  sheltering  Jesse  in 
Moab,  simply  on  the  recollection  of  his  Moabitish  extrac- 
tion two  generations  earlier  ;  or,  having  fallen, upon  it,  it  is 
probable  he  would  have  taken  care  to  draw  the  attention 
of  his  readers  towards  his  device  by  some  means  or  other, 
lest  the  evidence  it  was  intended  to  afford  of  the  truth  of 
the  history  might  be  thrown  away  upon  them.  As  it  is, 
the  circumstance  itself  is  asserted  without  the  smallest  at- 
tempt to  explain  or  account  for  it.  Nay,  recourse  must  be 
had  to  another  book  of  Scripture,  in  order  that  the  coinci- 
dence may  be  seen. 


VII. 

Events  roll  on,  and  another  incident  in  the  life  of  Da- 
vid now  offers  itself,  which  also  argues  the  truth  of  what 
we  read  concerning  him.  "  And  Michal,  Saul's  daughter, 
loved  David,"  we  are  told.2     On  becoming  his  wife,  she 

'  Ruth  i.  17.  s  1  Sam.  xviii.  20. 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  131 

gave  further  proof  of  her  affection  for  him,  by  risking  the 
vengeance  of  Saul  her  father,  when  she  let  David  through 
the  window  that  he  might  escape,  and  made  an  image  and 
put  it  in  the  bed,  to  deceive  Saul's  messengers.1  After  this, 
untoward  circumstances  produced  a  temporary  separation 
of  David  and  Michal.  She  remains  in  her  father's  custody, 
— and  Saul,  who  was  the  tyrant  of  his  family,  as  well  as 
of  his  people,  gives  her  "  unto  Phaltiel,  the  son  of  Laish," 
to  wife.  Meanwhile  David,  in  his  turn,  takes  Abigail 
the  widow  of  Nabal,  and  Ahinoam  of  Jezreel,  to  be  his 
wives  ;  and  continues  the  fugitive  life  he  had  been  so  long 
constrained  to  adopt  for  his  safety.  Years  pass  away,  and 
with  them  a  multitude  of  transactions  foreign  to  the  sub- 
ject I  have  now  before  me.  Saul  however  is  slain  ;  but  a 
formidable  faction  of  his  friends,  and  the  friends  of  his 
house,  still  survives.  Abner,  the  late  monarch's  captain, 
and  Ish-bosheth,  his  son  and  successor  in  the  kingdom  of 
Israel,  put  themselves  at  its  head.  But  David  waxing 
stronger  every  day,  and  a  feud  having  sprung  up  between 
the  prince  and  this  his  officer,  overtures  of  submission  are 
made  and  accepted,  of  which  the  following  is  the  substance  : 
"  And  Abner  sent  messengers  to  David  on  his  behalf,  say- 
ing, Whose  is  the  land  ?  saying,  also,  Make  thy  league 
with  me,  and  behold,  my  hand  shall  be  with  thee  to  bring 
about  all  Israel  unto  thee.  And  he  said,  Well,  I  will  make 
a  league  with  thee  ;  but  one  thing  I  require  of  thee — that 
is,  Thou  shalt  not  see  my  face,  except  thou  first  bring  Mi- 
chal, Saul's  daughter,  when  thou  comest  to  see  my  face. 
And  David  sent  messengers  to  Ish-bosheth,  Saul's  son,  say- 
ing, Deliver  me  my  wife  Michal,  whom  I  espoused  to  me. 
And  Ish-bosheth  sent  and  took  her  from  her  husband,  even 
from  Phaltiel  the  son  of  Laish.     And  her  husband  went 

1  1  Sam.  xix.  12. 


132  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    II. 

with  her  along,  weeping  behind  her  to  Bahurim.  Then 
said  Abner  unto  him,  Go,  return ;  and  he  returned."1  It 
is  probable,  therefore,  that  Michal  and  Phaltiel  parted  very 
reluctantly.  She  had  evidently  gained  his  affections  ;  he, 
most  likely,  had  won  hers  :  and  in  the  meantime  she  had 
been  supplanted,  (so  at  least  she  might  think,)  in  David's 
house  and  heart,  by  Abigail  and  Ahinoam.  These  were 
not  propitious  circumstances,  under  which  to  return  to 
the  husband  of  her  youth.  The  effect,  indeed,  they  were 
likely  to  have  upon  her  conduct  is  not  even  hinted  at  in  the 
remotest  degree  in  the  narrative :  but  they  supply  us,  how- 
ever, incidentally  with  the  link  that  couples  Michal  in  her 
first  character,  with  Michal  in  her  second  and  later  charac- 
ter ;  for  the  difference  between  them  is  marked,  though  it 
might  escape  us  on  a  superficial  glance ;  and  if  our  atten- 
tion did  not  happen  to  be  arrested  by  the  events  of  the  in- 
terval, it  would  almost  infallibly  escape  us.  The  last  act 
then,  in  which  we  left  Michal  engaged,  was  one  of  loyal 
attachment  to  David — saving  his  life,  probably  at  great 
risk  of  her  own ;  for  Saul  had  actually  attempted  to  put 
Jonathan  his  son  to  death  for  David's  sake,  and  why 
should  he  spare  Michal  his  daughter?2  Her  subsequent 
marriage  with  Phaltiel  was  Saul's  business ;  it  might,  or 
might  not,  be  with  her  consent :  an  act  of  conjugal  devo- 
tion to  David  was  the  last  scene  in  which  she  was,  to 
our  knowledge,  a  voluntary  actor.  Now  let  us  mark  the 
next, — not  the  next  event  recorded  in  order,  for  we  lose 
sight  of  Michal  for  a  season, — but  the  next  in  which  she 
is  a  party  concerned  ;  at  the  same  time  remembering  that 
the  Books  of  Samuel  do  not  offer  the  slightest  explanation 
of  the  contrast  which  her  former  and  latter  self  present,  or 
the  least  allusion  to  the  change.     David  brings  the  Ark 

i  2  Sam.  iii.  12—16.  a  l  Sam.  xx.  33. 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  133 

from  Kirjath-jearim,  where  it  had  been  abiding  since  it  was 
recovered  from  the  Philistines,  to  his  own  city.     He  dances 
before  it,  girded  with  the  priestly  or  prophetical  vest,  the 
men  ephod,  and  probably  chanting  his  own  noble  hymn, 
Lift  up  your  heads,  O  ye  gates !  and  be  ye  lift  up,  ye 
everlasting  doors,  and  the  King  of  Glory  shall  come  in  "" 
Michal,  ,n  that  hour,  no  doubt,  felt  and  reflected  the  joy  of 
her  husband  !     She  had  shared  with   him  the  day  of  ad- 
versity-she was  now  called  to  be  partaker  of  his  triumph  » 
How  read  we  ?     The  reverse  of  all  this.     «  Then  did  Mi- 
chal, Saul's  daughter,  look   through  a  window,  and   saw 
king  David  leaping  and  dancing  before  the  Lord,  and  she 
despised  him  in  her  heart"*     Nor  did  she  confine  her- 
self to  contemptuous  silence :  for  when  he  had  now  set  up 
the  Ark  in  the  midst  of  the  tabernacle,  and  had  blessed 
the  people,  he  came  unto  his  own  household  prepared,  in 
the  joy  and  devotion  of  the  moment,  to  bless   that  also 
How  then  is  he  received  by  the  wife  whom  he  had  twice 
won  at  the  hazard  of  his  own  life,  and  who  had  in  return 
shown  herself  heretofore  ready  to  sacrifice  her  own  safety 
for  his  preservation?     Thus  it  was.     «  Michal  came  out  to 
meet  him,  and  said,  How  glorious  was  the  king  of  Israel 
to-day  in  the  eyes  of  the  handmaids  of  his  servants '-as 
one  of  the  vain  fellows  shamelessly  uncovered!  himself" 
Here  was  a  burst  of  ill  temper,  which  rather  made  an  oc- 
casion for  showing  itself,  than  sought  one.     Accordingly* 
David  replies  with  spirit,  and  with  a  righteous  zeal  for  "the 
honor  of  God,_not  without  an  allusion  (as  I  think)  to  the 
secret,  but  true  cause  of  this  splenetic  attack,—"  It  was  be- 
fore the  Lord,  which  chose  me  before  thy  father,  and  be- 
fore all   us  house,  to  appoint  me  ruler  over  the  people  of 
the  Lord,  over  Israel :  therefore  will  I  play  before  the  Lord. 

»Psalmxxiv.7.  2  2  Sam.  vi.  16. 


134  THE    VERACITY   OF    THE  PART    II. 

And  I  will  yet  be  more  vile  than  this,  and  will  be  base  in 
mine  own  sight ;  and  of  the  maid-servants  which  thou 
hast  spoken  of,  of  them  shall  I  be  had  in  ho?ior"1  In 
these  handmaids  or  maid-servants,  which  are  so  promi- 
nently set  forth,  I  recognize,  if  I  mistake  not,  Abigail  and 
Ahinoara,  (he  rivals  of  Michal ;  and  the  very  pointed  re- 
buke which  the  insinuation  provokes  from  David,  appears 
to  me  to  indicate,  that  (whatever  she  might  affect)  he  felt 
that  the  gravamen  of  her  pretended  concern  for  his  debase- 
ment did,  in  truth,  rest  here.  And  may  I  not  add,  that  the 
winding  up  of  this  singular  incident,  "  Therefore  Michal, 
the  daughter  of  Saul,  had  no  child  unto  the  day  of  her 
death,"  well  accords  with  my  suspicions  ;  and  that  whether 
it  be  hereby  meant  that  God  judged  her,  or  that  David  di- 
vorced her,  there  is  still  something  in  the  nature  of  her 
punishment  appropriate  to  the  nature  of  her  transgres- 
sion ? 

On.  the  whole,  Michal  is  now  no  longer  what  Michal 
was — but  she  is  precisely  what,  from  the  new  position  in 
which  she  stands,  we  might  expect  her  to  be.  Yet  it  is  by 
the  merest  glimpses  of  the  history  of  David  and  her  own, 
that  we  are  enabled  to  account  for  the  change.  The 
fact  is  not  formally  explained  ;  it  is  not  even  formally  as- 
serted. All  that  appears,  is  a  marked  inconsistency  in  the 
conduct  of  Michal,  at  two  different  points  of  time;  and 
when  we  look  about  for  an  explanation,  we  perceive  in  the 
corresponding  fortunes  of  David,  as  compared  with  her 
own  dining  the  interval,  a  very  natural,  though  after  all 
only  a  conjectural,  explanation. 

Herein,  I  again  repeat,  ar#  the  characters  of  truth. — 
incidents  dropping  into  their  places  without  care  or  contri- 
vance,— the  fragments  of  an  imperfect  figure  recovered  out 

i  2  Sam.  vi.  21,  22. 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  135 

of  a  mass  cf  material,  and  found  to  be  still  its  component 
parts,  however  they  might  not  seem  such  when  individu- 
ally examined. 

And  here  let  me  remark,  (for  I  have  been  unwilling  to 
interrupt  my  argument  for  the  purpose  of  collateral  expla- 
nation, and  yet  without  it  I  may  be  thought  to  have  pur- 
chased the  evidence  at  some  expense  of  the  moral,)  that 
the  practice  of  polygamy,  which  was  not  from  the  begin- 
ning, but  which  Lamech  first  adopted,  probably  in  the 
hope  of  multiplying  his  issue,  and  so  possessing  himself 
of  that c*  seed,"  which  was  now  the  "desire  of  the  nations,"1 
— a  desire  which  serves  as  a  key  (the  only  satisfactory 
one,  I  think)  to  much  of  the  conduct  of  the  Patriarchs, — 
the  practice  of  polygamy,  I  say,  thus  introduced,  continued, 
in  David's  time,  not  positively  condemned  ;  Moses  having 
been  only  commissioned  to  regulate  some  of  the  abuses  to 
which  it  led ;  and  though  his  writing  of  divorcement 
must  be  considered  as  making  allowance  for  the  hardness 
of  heart  of  those  for  whom  he  was  legislating,  (our  Lord 
himself  so  considers  it,) — a  hardness  of  heart  confirmed  by 
a  long  and  slavish  residence  in  a  most  polluted  land  :  still 
that  writing,  lax  as  it  might  be,  was  no  doubt,  in  itself  a 
restrictive  law,  as  matters  then  stood.  The  provisions  of 
the  Levitical  code  in  general,  and  the  extremely  gross 
state  of  society  they  argue,  prove  that  it  must  have  been  a 
restrictive  law,  an  improvement  upon  past  practices  at 
least.  And  when  the  times  of  the  Gospel  approached,  and 
a  better  dispensation  began  to  dawn,  the  Almighty  pre- 
pared the  world,  by  the  mouth  of  a  Prophet,  to  expect 
those  restrictions  to  be  drawn  closer, — Malachi  being  com- 
manded to  proclaim  what  had  not  been  proclaimed  before, 
that  God  "  hated  putting  away."2     And  when  at  length 

1  Matt.  xix.  8.     On  this  subject,  see  Origen,  Ep.  ad  African.  $  8. 
»  Mai.  ii.  16. 


136  TH%    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    II. 

mankind  were  ripe  for  a  more  wholesome  decree.  Christ 
himself  pronounced  it,  and  thenceforward,  "  A  man  was 
to  cleave  unto  his  wife."  and  "  they  twain  were  to  be  one 
flesh,"  and  by  none  were  they  "  to  be  put  asunder,  God 
having  joined  them  together."1  Kprogressivr  scheme  this 
— agreeable  to  that  general  plan  by  which  the  Almighty 
seems  to  be  almost  always  guided  in  his  government — 
the  development  of  that  same  principle  by  which  the  law 
against  murder  was  passed  for  an  age  that  was  full  of  vio- 
lence ;  and  was  afterwards  sublimed  into  a  law  against 
malice :  by  which  the  law  against  adultery  was  provided 
for  a  carnal  and  grovelling  generation ;  and  was  after- 
wards refined  into  a  law  against  concupiscence :  by  which 
the  law  of  strict  retaliation,  and  no  more,  eye  for  eye,  and 
tooth  for  tooth — a  law,  low  and  ungenerous  as  it  may 
now  be  thought,  nevertheless  in  advance  of  the  people  for 
whom  it  was  enacted,  and  better  than  the  law  of  the 
strongest— afterwards  gave  place  to  that  other  and  nobler 
law,  "  resist  not  evil."  And  it  may  be  observed,  that  the 
very  case  of  divorce,  (and  polygamy  is  closely  connected 
with  it,)  is  actually  in  the  contemplation  of  our  Lord,  when 
he  is  thus  exhibiting  to  the  Jews  the  more  elevated  stand- 
ard of  Christian  morals,  and  is  ever  contrasting,  as  he  pro- 
ceeds,— u  It  was  said  by  them  of  old  time,"  with  his  own 
more  excellent  way,  "but  I  say  unto  you  ;"  as  if  in  times 
past,  according  to  the  words  of  the  Apostle,  "  God  suffered 
nations  to  walk  in  their  own  ways,"-  for  some  wise  pur- 
pose, and  for  a  while  "  winked  at  that  ignorance."3 

2  Mark  x.  7;  2  Cor.  xi  2.  2  Acts  xiv.  16.  Ibid.  xvii.  30. 


PART   II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  137 


VIII. 

But  there  is  another  circumstance  connected  with  this 
removal  of  the  Ark  of  God  to  Jerusalem,  which  bespeaks, 
like  the  last,  the  fidelity  with  which  the  tale  is  told.  It 
was  the  intention  of  David  to  have  conveyed  this  emblem 
of  God's  presence  with  his  people  from  Kirjath-jearim 
(from  Ephratah,  where  they  found  it  in  the  wood)3  at  once 
to  his  own  city.  An  incident,  however,  of  which  I  shall 
presently  speak,  occurred  to  shake  his  purpose  and  change 
his  plan.  "  So  David,"  we  read  upon  this,  "  would  not  re- 
move the  Ark  of  the  Lord  unto  him  into  the  city  of  David  ; 
but  David  carried  it  aside  into  the  house  of  Obed-Edom, 
the  Gittite."2  Now  what  regulated  David  in  choosing 
the  house  of  Obed-Edom  as  a  resting-place  for  the  Ark? 
Was  it  an  affair  of  mere  chance  ?  It  might  be  so ;  no 
motive  whatever,  for  the  selection  of  his  house  above  that 
of  another  man,  is  assigned — but  this  we  are  taught,  that 
':  when  the  cart  which  bare  the  Ark  came  to  Nachor's 
threshing-floor,  Uzzah  put  forth  his  hand  and  took  hold 
of  it,  for  the  oxen  shook  it ; — and  the  anger  of  the 
Lord  was  kindled  against  Uzzah,  and  God  smote  him 
there  for  his  error,  and  he  died  by  the  Ark  of  God."3  It 
had  been  commanded,  as  we  find  in  the  seventh  chapter 
of  the  Book  of  Numbers,  (v.  9,)  that  the  Ark  should  be 
borne  on  the  shoulders  of  the  Levites — David,  however, 
had  placed  it  in  a  cart  after  the  fashion  of  the  Philistines' 
idols,  and  had  neglected  the  Levi  deal  precept.  The  sud- 
den death  of  Uzzah,  and  the  nature  of  his  offence,  alarms 
him,  sets  him  to  think,  reminds  him  of  his  neglect,  and  he 

1  Ps.  exxxii.  6.  2  2  Sam.  vi.  10.  3  Ibid.  vi.  C. 

12* 


138 


THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART  II. 


turns  to  the  house  of  Obed-Edom,  the  Gittite.  The  epi- 
thet here  so  incidentally  annnexed  to  the  name  of  Obed- 
Edom,  enables  us  to  answer  the  question,  wherefore  David 
chose  the  house  of  this  man,  with  some  probability  of  be- 
ing, right  in  our  conjecture.  For  we  learn  from  the  Book 
of  Joshua,  that  Gath  (distinguished  from  other  towns  of 
the  same  name,  by  the  addition  of  Rimmon)1  was  one  of 
the  cities  of  the  Levites  ;  nor  of  the  Levites  onty,  but  of 
the  Kohat kites,  (v.  20,)  the  very  family  specially  set  apart 
from  the  Levites,  that  "  they  should  bear  the  Ark  upon 
their  shoulders."2  If,  therefore,  Obed-Edom  was  called 
the  Gittite,  from  this  Gath,  as  he  doubtless  was  so  called 
from  some  Gath  or  other,  then  must  he  have  been  a  Le- 
vite  ;  and  more  than  this  actually  a  Kohathite  ;  so  that  he 
would  be  strictly  in  his  office  when  keeping  the  Ark  ;  and 
because  he  was  so,  he  was  selected ;  David  causing  the 
Ark  to  be  "  carried  aside,"  or  out  of  the  direct  road,  (for 
that  is  the  force  of  the  expression,)3  precisely  for  the  pur- 
pose of  depositing  it  with  a  man  of  an  order,  and  of  a  pe- 
culiar division  of  that  order,  which  God  had  chosen  for 
his  Ark-bearers.  Accordingly,  we  read  in  the  fifteenth 
chapter  of  the  first  book  of  Chronicles,  where  a  fuller  ac- 
count, in  some  particulars,  is  given,  than  in  the  parallel 
passage  of  Samuel,  of  the  final  removal  of  the  Ark,  from 
under  the  roof  of  Obed-Edom  to  Jerusalem,  that  the  pro- 
fane cart  was  no  longer  employed  on  this  occasion,  but 
the  more  reverential  mode  of  conveyance,  and  that  which 
the  law  enjoined,  was  now  strictly  adopted  in  its  stead  ; 
(v.  15  ;)  and  moreover  that  Obed-Edom  was  appointed  to 
take  an  active  part  in  the  ceremonial,     (v.  18.  24.) 

This  I  look  upon  as  a  coincidence  of  some  value — (sup- 

1  Joshua  xxi.  24.  2  Numb.  vii.  9. 

3  See  Numb.  xx.  17.  where  the  same  Hebrew  word  is  used,  and  xxii.  23. 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  139 

posing  it,  of  course,  to  be  fairly  made  out) — of  some  value, 
I  mean,  even  independent!}-  of  its  general  bearing  upon 
the  credibility  of  Scripture  ;  for  it  is  a  touch  of  truth  in 
the  circumstantial  details  of  an  event  which  is  in  its  nature 
miraculous.  This  it  establishes  as  a  fact,  that,  for  some 
reason  or  other,  David  went  out  of  his  way  to  deposit  the 
Ark  with  an  individual  of  a  family  whose  particular  pro- 
vince it  was  to  serve  and  bear  the  Ark.  This,  I  say,  is 
established  by  the  coincidence  as  a  fact — and  here,  taking 
my  stand  with  substantial  ground  under  my  feet,  I  can 
with  safety,  and  without  violence,  gradually  feel  my  way 
along  through  the  inconvenience  which  prompted  this  de- 
viation from  the  direct  path  ;  this  change  in  the  mode  of 
conveyance;  this  sudden  reverence  for  the  laws  of  the 
Ark  ;  even  up  to  the  disaster  which  befell  the  rash  and  un- 
consecrated  Uzzah,  and  the  caution  and  alarm  it  inspired, 
as  being  a  manifest  interposition  of  God  for  the  vindica 
tion  of  his  honor;  and  when  I  find  the  apparently  trivial 
appellation  of  the  Gittile,  thus  pleading  for  the  reality  of 
a  marvellous  act  of  the  Almighty,  I  am  reminded  how 
carefully  we  should  gather  up  every  word  of  Scripture  that 
nothing  be  lost ;  and  I  am  led  to  contemplate  the  precau- 
tions, the  superstitious  precautions  of  the  Rabbins,  if  you 
will,  that  one  jot  or  one  tittle  may  not  be  suffered  to  pass 
from  the  text  of  the  law,  not  without  respect,  as  if  its  every 
letter  might  contain  some  hidden  treasure,  some  unsus- 
pected fount,  from  which  virtue  might  happily  go  out  for 
evidence,  for  doctrine,  or  for  duty. 


IX 


We  are  now  arrived  at  another  incident  in  the  history 
of  David — for  I  must  still  call  your  attention  to  the  me- 


140  THE    VERACITY    OF   THE  PART    II. 

moirs  of  that  extraordinary  person,  as  exhibiting  marks  of 
truth  and  reality,  numerous  perhaps  beyond  those  which 
any  other  character  of  the  same  antiquity  presents — an  in- 
cident which  has  been  accounted,  and  most  justly,  ac- 
counted, the  reproach  of  his  life.  The  province  which  I 
have  marked  out  for  myself  in  this  work,  is  the  evidence 
for  the  veracity  of  the  sacred  historians,  and  not  the  inter- 
pretation of  the  moral  difficulties  which  the  history  itself 
may  sometimes  involve.  In  the  present  instance,  however, 
the  very  coincidence  which  establishes  the  trustworthiness 
of  the  history,  may  serve  also  to  remove  some  stumbling- 
blocks  out  of  the  sceptic's  path,  and  vindicate  the  ways  of 
God  to  man. 

That  the  man  after  God's  oWn  heart  should  have  so 
fallen  from  his  high  estate,  as  to  become  the  adulterer  and 
the  assassin,  has  been  ever  urged  with  great  effect  by  un- 
believers; and  this  very  consequence  of  David's  sin  was 
foreseen  and  foretold  by  Nathan  the  prophet,  when  he  ap- 
proached the  king,  bearing  with  him  the  rebuke  of  God  on 
his  tongue,  and  saying,  "  By  this  deed  thou  hast  given 
great  occasion  to  the  enemies  of  God  to  blaspheme." 
Such  has  indeed  been  its  effect  from  the  day  when  it  was 
first  dene  unto  this  day,  and  such  probably  will  its  effect 
continue  to  be  unto  the  end  of  time.  David's  transores- 
sion,  committed  almost  three  thousand  years  ago,  sheds, 
in  some  sort,  an  evil  influence  on  the  cause  of  David's 
God  even  now.  So  wide-wasting  is  the  mischief  which 
flows  from  the  lapse  of  a  righteous  man  ;  so  great  the  dark- 
ness becomes,  when  the  light  that  is  amongst  us  is  dark- 
ness !  But  was  David  the  man  after  God's  own  heart 
here?  It  were  blasphemy  to  suppose  it.  That  the  sin 
of  David  was  fulfilling  some  righteous  judgment  of  God 
against  Uriah  and  his  house,  I  doubt  not — for  God  often 
makes  his  enemies  his  instruments,  and  without  sanctify- 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  141 

ing  the  means,  strikes  out  of  them  good.    Still  a  sin  it  was, 
great  and  grievous,  offensive  to  that  God  to  whom  the 
blood  of  Uriah  cried  from  the  ground.     And  this  the  Al- 
mighty proclaimed  even  more  loudly  perhaps  by  suffering 
David  to  live,  than  if,  in  the  sudden  burst  of  his  instant 
displeasure,  he  had  slain  him.     For,  at  the  period  when 
the  king  of  Israel  fell  under  this  sad  temptation,  he  was  at 
the  very  height  of  his  glory  and  his  strength.     The  king- 
dom of  Israel  had  never  so  flourished  before  ;  it  was  the 
first  of  the  nations.     He  had  thoroughly  subdued  the  Phil- 
istines, that  mighty  people,  who  in  his  youth  had  com- 
pelled all  the  Israelites  to  come  down  to  their  quarters, 
even  to  sharpen  their  mattocks,  so  rigid  was  the  exercise 
of  their  rule.     He  had  smitten  the  Moabites,  on  the  other 
side  Jordan,  once  themselves  the  oppressors  of  Israel,  mak- 
ing them  tributaries.     He  had  subdued   the  Edomites,  a 
race  that  delighted  in  war ;  and  had  stationed  his  troops 
throughout  all  their  territories.     He  had  possessed  himself 
of  the  independent  kingdom  of  the  Syrians,  and  garrisoned 
Damascus,  their  capital.     He  had  extended  his  frontier 
eastward  to  the  Euphrates,1  though  never  perhaps  beyond 
it  ;2  and  he  was  on  the  point  of  reducing  the  Ammonites, 
whose  city,  Rabbah,  his  generals  were  besieging  ;  and  thus, 
the  whole  of  the  promised  land,  with  the  exception  of  the 
small  state  of  Tyre,  which  the  Israelites  never  appear  to 
have  conquered,  was  now  his  own.     Prosperity,  perhaps, 
had  blinded  his  eyes,  and  hardened  his  heart.     The  treas- 
ures which  he  had  amassed,  and  the  ease  which  he  had 
fought  for  and  won,  had  made  him  luxurious  ;  for  now  it 
was,  that  the  once  innocent  son  of  Jesse  the  Bethlehemite, 
— he  who  had  been  taken  from  the  sheep-folds  because  an 
excellent  spirit  was  in  him,  and  who  had  hitherto  pros- 

»  2  Sam.  viii.  '2  See  Ezra  iv.  20. 


142  THE    VERACITY   OP   THE  PART    It. 

pered  in  all  that  he  had  set  his  hand  unto, — it  was  now  that 
this  man  was  tempted  and  fell.     And  now  mark  the  re- 
mainder of  his  days — God  eventually  forgave  him,  for  he 
repented  him  (as  his  penitential  psalms  still  most  affect- 
ingly  attest),  in  the  bitterness  and  anguish  of  his  soul ; 
but  God  dried  up  all  the  sources  of  his  earthly  blessings 
thenceforward  forever.     With  this  sin  the  sorrow  of  his 
life  began,  and  the  curse  which  the  prophet  denounced 
against  him,  sat  heavy  on  his  spirit  to  the  last ;  a  curse — 
and  I  beg  attention  to  this — which  has  a  peculiar  reference 
to  the  nature  of  his  crime  ;  as  though  upon  this  offence 
all  his  future  miseries  and  misfortunes  were  to  turn ;  as 
though  he  was  only  spared  from  the  avenger's  violent  hand 
to  be  made  a  spectacle  of  righteous  suffering  to  the  world. 
He  had  committed  murder  by  the  edge  of  the  sword,  and 
therefore  the  sword  was  never  to  depart  from  his  house. 
He  had  despised  the  commandment  of  the  Lord  (so  Nathan 
expressly  says),  and  taken  the  wife  of  another  to  be  his 
wife ;  therefore  were  his  own  wives  to  be  taken  from  him, 
and  given  to   his  neighbor  in   turn.     The   complexion, 
therefore,  of  his  remaining  years,  was  set  by  this  one  fatal 
deed  of  darkness,  (let  none  think  or  say  that  it  was  lightly 
regarded  by  the  Almighty,)  and  having  become  the  man 
of  blood,  of  blood  he  was  to  drink  deep  ;  and  having  be- 
come the  man  of  lust,  by  that  same  baneful  passion  in 
others  was  he  himself  to  be  scourged  forever.     Now  the 
manner  in  which  these  tremendous  threats  are  fulfilled  is 
very  remarkable  ;  for  it  is  done  by  way  of  natural  conse- 
quence of  the  sin  itself ;  a  dispensation  which  I  have  not 
seen  developed  as  it  deserves  to  be,  though  the  facts  of  the 
history    furnish   very  striking  materials  for  the   purpose. 
And  herein  lies  the  coincidence,  to  which  the  remarks  I 
have  hitherto  been  making  are  a  needful  prologue. 

By  the  rebellion  of  Absalom  it  was  that  these  menaces 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  143 

of  the  Almighty  Judge  of  all  the  earth  were  accomplished 
with  a  fearful  fidelity. 

Absalom  was  able  to  draw  after  him  the  hearts  of  all  the 
people  as  one  man.  And  what  was  it  that  armed  him 
with  this  moral  strength  ?  What  was  it  that  gave  him 
the  means  of  unseating  his  father  in  the  affections  of  a 
loyal  people  ? — The  king  whom  they  had  so  greatly  loved 
— who  had  raised  the  name  of  Israel  to  a  pitch  of  glory 
never  attained  unto  before — whose  praises  had  been  sung 
by  the  mothers  and  maidens  of  Israel,  as  the  champion  to 
whom  none  other  was  like  1  How  could  he  steal  away 
the  hearts  of  the  people  from  such  a  man,  with  so  little 
effort,  and  apparently  with  so  little  reason  1  I  believe  that 
this  very  sin  of  David  was  made  the  engine  by  which  his 
throne  was  shaken  ;  for  I  observe  that  the  chief  instrument 
in  the  conspiracy  was  Ahithophel.  No  sooner  was  Absa- 
lom determined  upon  his  daring  deed,  than  he  looks  to 
Ahithophel  for  help.  He  appears,  for  some  reason  or  other 
not  mentioned,  to  have  quite  reckoned  upon  him  as  well- 
affected  to  his  cause,  as  ready  to  join  him  in  it  heart  and 
hand  ;  and  he  did  not  find  himself  mistaken.  "  Absalom," 
I  read,1  "  sent  for  Ahithophel  the  Gilonite,  David's  coun- 
sellor, from  his  city,  even  from  Giloh,  while  he  offered  sac- 
rifices— and  the  conspiracy,''  (it  is  forthwith  added,  as 
though  Ahithophel  was  a  host  in  himself, )  "  was  strong ; 
for  the  people  increased  continually  with  Absalom."  David, 
upon  this,  takes  alarm,  and  makes  it  the  subject  of  his 
earnest  prayer  to  God,  that  "  he  would  turn  the  counsel  of 
Ahithophel  into  foolishness."  Nor  is  this  to  be  wondered 
at,  when  we  are  told  in  another  place  that  "  the  counsel 
of  Ahithophel,  which  he  counselled  in  those  days,  was  as 
if  a  man  had  inquired  at  the  oracle  of  God :  so  was  all 

i  2  Sam.  xv.  12. 


144  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    II. 

the  counsel  of  Ahithophel,  both  with  David  and  with  Ab- 
salom."1 He  therefore  was  the  sinews  of  Absalom's  cause. 
Of  his  character,  and  the  influence  which  he  possessed 
over  the  people,  Absalom  availed  himself,  both  to  sink  the 
spirits  of  David's  party,  and  to  inspire  his.  own  with  confi- 
dence, for  all  men  counted  Ahithophel  to  be  as  a  prophet. 
But  independently  of  the  weight  of  his  public  reputation, 
it  is  probable  that  certain  private  wrongs  of  his  own,  (of 
which  I  have  now  to  speak,)  at  once  prepared  him  for  ac- 
cepting Absalom's  rebellious  overtures  with  alacrity,  and 
caused  him  to  find  still  greater  favor  in  the  eyes  of  the 
people,  as  being  an  injured  man,  whom  it  was  fit  that  they 
should  avenge  of  his  adversary.  For  in  the  twenty-third 
chapter  of  the  second  Book  of  Samuel,  I  find  in  the  cata- 
logue of  David's  guardsmen,  thirty-seven  in  u umber,  the 
name  of  "Eliam  the  son  of  Ahithophel  the  Gilonite"  (v. 
34.)  The  epithet  of  Gilonite  sufficiently  identifies  this 
Ahithophel  with  the  conspirator  of  the  same  name.  One, 
therefore,  of  the  thirty-seven  officers  about  David's  person, 
wras  a  son  of  the  future  conspirator  against  his  throne. 
But,  in  this  same  catalogue,  I  also  meet  with  the  name  of 
Uriah  the  Hittite  (v.  39).  Eliam.  therefore,  and  Uriah 
must  have  been  thrown  much  together,  being  both  of  the 
same  rank,  and  being  each  one  of  the  thirty-seven  officers 
of  the  king's  guard.  Now.  from  the  eleventh  chapter  of 
the  second  Book  of  Samuel,  I  learn  that  Uriah  the  Hittite 
had  for  his  wife  Bath-sheba,  the  daughter  of  one  Eliam 
(v.  3).  I  look  upon  it, 'therefore,  to  be  so  probable,  as  al- 
most to  amount  to  certainty,  that  this  was  the  same  Eliam 
as  before,  and  that  Uriah  (as  was  very  natural,  considering 
the  necessary  intercourse  of  the  parties)  had  married  the 
daughter  of  his  brother  officer,  and  accordingly,  the  grand- 

«  2  Sam.  xvi.  23. 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  145 

daughter  of  Ahithophel.  I  feel  that  I  now  have  the  key 
to  the  conduct  of  this  leading  conspirator ;  the  sage  and 
prudent  friend  of  David  converted,  by  some  means  or 
other,  into  his  deadly  foe — for  I  now  perceive,  that  when 
David  murdered  Uriah,  he  murdered  Ahithophel's  grand- 
son by  marriage,  and  when  he  corrupted  Bath-sheba,  he 
corrupted  his  grandmother  by  blood.  Well  then,  after 
this  disaster  and  dishonor  of  his  house,  might  revenge 
rankle  in  the  heart  of  Ahithophel !  Well  might  Absalom 
know  that  nothing  but  a  fit  opportunity  was  wanted  by 
him,  that  he  might  give  it  vent,  and  spend  his  treasured 
wrath  upon  the  head  of  David  his  wrong-doer !  Well 
might  he  approach  him  with  confidence,  and  impart  to  him 
his  treason,  as  a  man  who  would  welcome  the  news,  and 
be  his  present  and  powerful  fellow-worker!  Well  might 
the  people  who,  upon  an  appeal  like  this,  seldom  fail  to 
follow  the  dictates  of  their  better  feelings,  and  to  stand 
manfully  by  the  injured,  find  their  allegiance  to  a  throne 
defiled  with  adultery  and  blood,  relaxed,  and  their  loyalty 
transferred  to  the  rebel's  side  !  And  the  terms  in  which 
Shimei  reproaches  the  king,  when  he  follows  after  him  to 
Bahurim.  casting  stones  at  him,  not  improbably  as  expres- 
sive of  the  legal  punishment  of  the  adulterer,  "  Come  out, 
come  out,  thou  bloody  man,  thou  man  of  Belial ;'"  and 
the  meekness  moreover  with  which  David  bows  to  the  re- 
proach, accepting  it  as  a  merited  chastisement  from  God. 
"  So  let  him  curse,  because  the  Lord  hath  said  unto  him, 
Curse  David,"  (v.  20  ;)  are  minute  incidents  which  testify 
to  the  same  fact — to  the  popular  voice  now  lifted  up  against 
David,  and  to  the  merited  cause  thereof.  Well  might 
he  find  his  heart  sink  within  him,  when  he  heard  that  his 
ancient  counsellor  had  joined  the  ranks  of  his  enemies, 


i  2  Sam.  ivi.  7 

13 


146  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    II. 

and  when  he  knew  but  too  well  what  reason  he  had  given 
him  for  turning  his  arms  against  himself  in  that  unmiti- 
gated and  inextinguishable  thirst  for  vengeance  which  is 
sweet,  however  utterly  unjustifiable,  to  all  men  so  deeply 
injured,  and  sweetest  of  all  to  the  children  of  the  East! 
And  in  the  very  first  word  of  exhortation  which  Ahithophel 
suggests  to  Absalom,  I  detect,  or  think  I  detect,  the  wound- 
ed spirit  of  the  man  seizing  the  earliest  moment  for  inflict- 
ing a  punishment  upon  his  enemy,  of  a  kind  that  should 
not  only  be  bitter,  but  appropriate. — the  eye  for  the  eye ; 
and  when  Absalom  said,  "  Give  counsel  among  you  what 
we  shall  do,''  and  Ahithophel  answered,  "  Go  in  unto  thy 
father's  concubines  which  he  hath  left  to  keep  the  house,"1 
he  was  not  only  moved  by  the  desire  that  the  rebellious 
son  should  stand  fairly  committed  to  his  rebellion  by  an 
unpardonable  outrage  against  the  majesty  of  an  eastern 
monarch,  but  by  the  desire  also  to  make  David  taste  the 
bitterness  of  that  cup  which  he  had  caused  others  to  drink, 
and  to  receive  the  very  measure  which  he  had  himself 
meted  withal.  And  so  it  came  to  pass,  that  Absalom  fol- 
lowed his  counsel,  and  they  spread  for  him  the  incestuous 
tent,  we  read,  on  the  top  of  the  house,  in  the  sight  of  all 
Israel,2  on  that  very  roof,  it  should  seem,  on  which  David 
at  even-tide  had  walked,  when  he  conceived  this  his  great 
sin,  upon  which  his  life  was  to  turn  as  upon  a  hinge  ;3  and 
so  again  it  came  to  pass,  and  under  circumstances  of  local 
identity  and  exposure  which  wear  the  aspect  of  strictly 
judicial  reprisals,  that  that  which  he  had  done  secretly 
(his  abduction  of  nnother  man's  wife)  God  did  for  him,  and 
more  also,  as  he  saicl  he  would,  before  all  Israel,  and  before 
the  sun.4 

Thus,  having  once  discovered  by  the  apposition  of  many 

'  2  Sam.  xvi.  21.  2  lb.  ivi.  22.  3  lb.  xi.  2.         <  lb.  xii.  12. 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  147 

passages,  that  a  relation  subsisted  between  Ahithophel 
and  Uriah,  a  fact  which  the  sacred  historian  is  so  far  from 
dwelling  upon  that  he  barely  supplies  us  with  the  means 
to  establish  it  at  all,  we  see  in  the  circumstances  of  the 
conspiracy,  the  natural  recoil  of  David's  sin  ;  and  in  his 
punishment,  retributive  as  it  is,  so  strictly  retributive,  that 
it  must  have  stricken  his  conscience  as  a  judgment,  even 
had  there  been  no  warning  voice  concerning  it,  the  accom- 
plishment by  means  the  most  easy  and  unconstrained,  of 
all  that  Nathan  had  uttered,  to  the  syllable. 


X. 


There  is  another  incident  connected  with  this  part  of 
the  history  of  David,  which  I  have  pondered,  alternately 
accepting  and  rejecting  it,  as  still  further  corroborating 
the  opinion  I  have  expressed,  that  the  fortunes  of  David 
turned  upon  this  one  sin — that  having  mounted  to  their 
high  mark,  they  henceforward  began,  and  continued  to 
ebb  away — this  one  sin  which,  according  to  Scripture, 
itself  eclipsed  every  other.  For  though  it  would  not  be 
difficult  to  name  sundry  instances  of  ignorance,  of  negli- 
gence, of  inconsideration,  of  infirmity  in  the  life  of  David 
besides  this,  it  is  nevertheless  said,  that  "he  did  that 
which  was  right  in  the  eyes  of  the  Lord,  and  turned  not 
aside  in  anything  that  he  commanded  him  all  the  days  of 
his  life,  save  only  in  the  matter  of  Uriah  the  HittiteP* 
1  propose,  however,  this  coincidence  for  the  reason  I  have 
said,  not  without  some  hesitation  ;  though  at  the  same 
time,  quite  without  concern  for  the  safety  of  my  cause,  it 
being,  as  I  observed  in  the  beginning  of  this  work,  a  very 

1  1  Kings  xv.  5.     See  Sanderson,  Serm.  iv.  ad  Aulam,  p.  79,  fol. 


148  THE    VERACITY   OF    THE  PART  II. 

valuable  property  of  the  argument  by  which  I  am  endeav- 
oring to  establish  the  credibility  of  Scripture,  that  any 
member  of  it,  if  unsound  or  unsatisfactory,  may  be  de- 
tached without  further  injury  to  the  whole,  than  the  mere 
loss  Of  that  member  entails. 

This,  therefore,  I  perceive,  or  think  I  perceive,  that 
David  became  throughly  encumbered  by  his  connection 
with  Joab,  the  captain  of  his  armies  ;  that  he  was  too 
suspicious  to  trust  him,  and  too  weak  to  dismiss  him  ;  that 
this  officer,  by  some  chance  or  other,  had  established  a 
despotic  control  over  the  king ;  and  that  it  is  not  unrea- 
sonable to  believe  (and  here  lies  the  coincidence),  that 
when  David  made  him  the  partner  and  secret  agent  of 
his  guilty  purpose  touching  Uriah,  he  sold  himself  into 
his  hands  :  that  in  that  fatal  letter  he  sealed  away  his 
liberty,  and  surrendered  it  up  to  this  his  unscrupulous 
accomplice.  Certain  it  is,  that  during  all  the  latter  years 
of  his  reign,  David  was  little  more  than  a  nominal  king. 

Joab,  no  doubt,  was  by  nature  a  man  that  could  do  and 
dare — a  bold  captain  in  bad  times.  The  faction  of  Saul 
was  so  strong,  that  David  could  at  first  scarcely  call  the 
throne  his  own,  or  choose  his  servants  according  to  his 
pleasure  ;  and  Joab,  an  able  warrior,  though  sometimes 
avenging  his  own  private  quarrels  at  the  expense  of  his 
sovereign's  honor,  and  thereby  vexing  him  at  the  heart, 
was  not  to  be  displaced ;  he  was  then  too  hard  for  David, 
as  the  king  himself  complains.1  But  as  yet,  David  was 
not  tongue-tied  at  least.  He  openly,  and  without  reserve, 
reprobated  the  conduct  of  Joab  in  slaying  Abner,  though 
he  had  the  excuse,  such  as  it  was,  of  taking  away  the  life 
of  the  man  by  whose  hand  his  brother  Asahel  had  fallen. 
Moreover,  he  so  far  asserted  his  own  authority,  as  to  make 

1  2  Sam.  iii.  39. 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  149 

him  rend  his  clothes,  and  gird  him  with  sackcloth,  and 
mourn  before  this  very  Abner,  whom  he  had  thus  vindic- 
tively laid  low  ;  doubtless  a  bitter  and  mortifying  penance 
to  a  man  of  the  stout  heart  of  Joab,  and  such  as  argued 
David,  who  insisted  upon  it,  to  be  as  yet  in  his  own  do- 
minions supreme.  Circumstances  might  constrain  him 
still  to  employ  this  famous  captain,  but  he  had  not  at  least 
(young  as  his  authority  then  was)  yielded  himself  up  to 
his  imperious  subject.  On  the  contrary,  waxing  stronger 
as  he  did,  every  day,  and  the  remnant  of  Saul's  party  dis- 
persed, he  became  the  king  of  Israel  in  fact,  as  well  as  in 
name  ;  his  throne  established  not  only  upon  law,  but  upon 
public  opinion  too,  so  that  "  whatever  the  king  did,"  we 
are  told,  "pleased  all  the  people."1  He  was  now  in  a  con- 
dition to  rule  for  himself,  and  for  himself  he  did  rule 
(whatever  had  become  of  Joab  in  the  mean  season) ;  for 
we  presently  find  him  appointing  that  officer  to  the  com- 
mand of  his  army  by  his  own  act  and  deed,  simply  be- 
cause he  happened  to  be  the  man  to  win  that  rank 
when  it  was  proposed  by  David  as  the  prize  of  battle 
to  any  individual  of  his  whole  host,  who  should  first 
get  up  the  gutter  and  smite  the  Jebusites  at  the  storm- 
ing of  Zion.2  And  whoever  will  peruse  the  eighth  and 
tenth  chapters  of  the  second  Book  of  Samuel,  in  which 
are  recorded  the  noble  achievements  of  David  at  this 
bright  period  of  his  life,  his  power  abroad  and  his  policy 
at  home,  the  energy  which  he  threw  into  the  national 
character,  and  the  respect  which  he  commanded  for  it, 
throughout  all  the  East,  will  perceive  that  he  reigned 
without  a  restraint  and  without  a  rival.  Now  conies  tbe 
guilty  act;  the  fatal  stumbling-block  against  which  he 
dashed  his    foot,  and    fell   so  pernicious  a  height.     And 

1  2  Sam.  iii.  36.  2  ib.  v.  8 ;  1  Chron.  xi.  6. 

13* 


150  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    II. 

henceforwards  I  see,  or  imagine  I  see,  Joab  usurping  by 
degress  an  authority  which  he  had  not  before;  taking 
upon  himself  too  much  ;  executing  or  disregarding  David's 
orders,  as  it  suited  his  own  convenience  ;  and  finally  con- 
spiring against  his  throne  and  the  rightful  succession  of 
his  line.  Again  ;  I  perceive,  if  I  mistake  not,  the  hands 
of  David  tied  ;  his  efforts  to  disembarrass  himself  of  his 
oppressor,  feeble  and  ineffectual:  his  resentment  set  at 
nought ;  his  punishments,  though  just,  resisted  by  his 
own  subject,  and  successfully  resisted.  For  I  find  Joab 
suggesting  to  David  the  recall  of  Absalom  after  his  ban- 
ishment, through  the  widow  of  Tekoah,  in  a  manner  to 
excite  the  suspicion  of  the  king.?  "  Is  not  the  hand  of 
Joab  with  thee  in  all  this?"  were  words  in  which  probably 
more  was  meant  than  met  the  ear.  It  is  not  unlikely 
(though  the  passage  is  altogether  mysterious  and  obscure) 
that  there  was  then  some  secret  understanding  between 
the  soldier  and  the  future  rebel,  which  was  only  inter- 
rupted by  the  impetuosity  of  Absalom,  who  resented  Joab's 
delay,  and  set  fire  to  his  barley  ;2  an  injury  which  he 
must  have  had  some  reason  to  feel  Joab  durst  not  resent, 
and  which,  in  fact,  even  in  spite  of  the  fury  of  his  natural 
character,  he  did  not  resent.  Howbeit,  he  remembered  it 
in  the  rebellion  which  now  broke  out,  and  took  his  per- 
sonal revenge  whilst  he  was  professedly  fighting  the  battle 
of  David,  to  whom  his  interest  or  his  passion  decided  him 
for  this  time  to  be  true.  "  Deal  gently  for  my  sake  with  the 
young  man,' even  with  Absalom,"  was  the  parting  charge 
which  the  king  gave  to  this  dangerous  champion  as  he 
went  forth  with  the  host :  in  the  hearing  of  all  the  people 
he  gave  it,  and  to  all  the  captains  who  were  with  him.  It 
was  the  thing  nearest  his  heart.     For  here  it  may  be  ob- 

2  Sam.  xiv.  19.  «  lb.  xiv.  30. 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  151 

served,  that  David's  strong  parental  feelings,  of  which  we 
have  many  occasional  glimpses,  give  an  identity  to  his 
character,  which,  in  itself,  marks  it  to  be  a  real  one.  The 
fear  of  the  servants  to  tell  him  that  his  infant  was  dead ;' 
the  advice  of  Jonadab,  "  a  subtle  man,"  who  had  read  Da- 
vid's disposition  right,  to  Amnon,  to  feign  himself  sick, 
that  u  when  his  father  came  to  see  him ,"  he  might  prefer 
to  him  his  recpaest  ;2  his  "  weeping  so  sore"  for  the  death 
of  this  son,  and  then  again,  his  anguish  subsided,  <;his 
soul  longing  to  go  forth"  to  the  other  son  who  had  slain 
him  ;3  the  little  trait  which  escapes  in  the  history  of  Adon- 
ijah's  rebellion,  another  of  his  children,  that  "  his  father 
had  not  displeased  him  at  any  time,  in  saying,  "Why  hast 
thou  done  so  ?"4  are  all  evidently  features  of  one  and  the 
same  individual.  So  these  last  instructions  to  his  officers 
touching  the  safety  of  Absalom,  even  when  he  was  in  arms 
against  him,  are  still  uttered  in  the  same  spirit ;  a  spirit 
which  seems,  even  at  this  moment,  far  more  engrossed  with 
the  care  of  his  child  than  with  the  event  of  his  battle.  "  Deal 
gently  for  my  sake  with  Absalom."  Joab  heard,  indeed, 
but  heeded  not ;  he  had  lost  all  reverence  for  the  king's 
commands ;  nothing  could  be  more  deliberate  than  his  in- 
fraction of  this  one,  probably  the  most  imperative  whick 
had  ever  been  laid  upon  him  :  it  was  not  in  the  fury  of 
(he  fight  that  he  forgot  the  commission  of  mercy,  and  cut 
down  the  young  man  with  whom  he  was  importuned  to 
deal  tenderly ;  but  as  he  was  hanging  in  a  tree,  helpless 
and  hopeless  ;  himself  directed  to  the  spot  by  the  steps  of 
another ;  in  cold  blood  ;  but  remembering  perhaps  his 
barley,  and  more  of  which  we  know  not,  and  caring  noth- 
ing for  a  king  whose  guilty  secret  he  had  shared,  he 
thrust  him  through  the   heart  with  his  three  darts,  and 

»  2  Sam.  xii.  18.        2  ib.  xiii.  5.         3  lb.  xiii.  36.         *  1  Kings  i.  6. 


152  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    II. 

then  made  his  way,  with  countenance  unabashed,  into  the 
chamber  of  his  royal  master,  where  he  was  weeping  and 
mourning  for  Absalom. 

The  bitterness  of  death  must  have  been  nothing  to  Da- 
vid, compared  with  the  feelings  of  that  hour  when  his  con- 
science smote  him,  (as  it  doubtless  did)  with  the  complicated 
trouble  and  humiliation  into  which  his  deed  of  lust  and 
blood  had  thus  sunk  him  down.  The  rebellion  itself,  the 
fruit  of  it,  (as  I  hold  ;)  the  audacious  disobedience  of  Joab 
to  the  moving  entreaties  of  the  parent,  that  his  favorite 
son's  life  might  be  spared,  rebel  as  he  was.  felt  to  be  the 
fruit  of  that  sin  too ;  for  by  that  sin  it  was  that  he  had  de- 
livered himself  and  his  character  bound  hand  and  foot,  to 
the  tender  mercies  of  Joab,  who  had  no  touch  of  pity  in 
him.  The  sequel  is  of  a  piece  with  the  opening  ;  Joab 
imperious,  and  David,  the  once  high-minded  David,  abject 
in  spirit  and  tame  to  the  lash.  "  Thou  hast  shamed  this 
day  the  face  of  all  thy  servants.  Arise,  go  forth,  and  speak 
comfortably  to  thy  servants;  for  I  swear  by  the  Lord,  if 
thou  go  not  forth,  there  will  not  tarry  one  with  thee  this 
night :  and  that  will  be  worse  unto  thee  than  all  the  evil 
that  befell  thee  from  thy  youth  up  until  now."1  The  pas- 
sive king  yields  to  the  menace,  for  what  can  he  do?  and 
with  a  cheerful  countenance  and  a  broken  heart  obeys  the 
commands  of  his  subject,  and  sits  in  the  gate.  But  this  is 
not  all.  David  now  sends  a  message  to  Amasa,  a  kinsman 
whom  Absalom  had  set  over  his  rebel  army ;  it  is  a  propo- 
sal, perhaps  a.  secret  proposal,  to  make  him  captain  over  his 
host  in  the  room  of  Joab.  The  measure  might  be  dictated 
at  once  by  policy,  Amasa  being  now  the  leader  of  a  pow- 
erful party  whom  David  had  to  win,  and  by  disgust  at  the 
recent  perfidy  of  Joab,  and  a  determination  to  break  away 

«  2  Sam.  xix.  7. 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  153 

from  him  at  whatever  cost.  Amasa  accepts  the  offer  ;  but 
in  thf:  very  first'  military  enterprise  on  which  he  is  dis- 
patched, Joab  accosts  him  with  the  friendly  salutation  of 
the  East,  and  availing  himself  of  the  unguarded  moment, 
draws  a  sword  from  under  his  garment,  smites  him  under 
the  fifth  rib,  and  leaves  him  a  bloody  corpse  in  the  high- 
way. Then  he  calmly  takes  upon  himself  to  execute  the 
commission  with  which  Amasa  had  been  charged  ;  and 
this  done,  "  he  returns  to  Jerusalem,"  we  read.  "  unto  the 
king,"  and  once  more  he  is  '•'  over  all  the  host  of  Israel." 

It  is  needless  to  point  out  how  extreme  a  helplessness  on 
the  part  of  David  this  whole  transaction  indicates.  Here 
is  the  general  of  his  own  choice  assassinated  in  an  act  of 
duty  by  his  own  subject,  his  commission  usurped  by  the 
murderer,  and  David,  once  the  most  popular  and  powerful  of 
sovereigns,  saying  not  word.  The  dishonor,  indeed,  he  felt 
keenly ;  felt  it  to  his  dying  day,  and  in  his  very  latest 
breath  gave  utterance  to  it;1  but  Joab  has  him  in  the  toils, 
and  extricate  himself  he  cannot.  The  want  of  cordiality 
between  them  was  now  manifest  enough,  however  the 
original  cause  might  be  conjectured,  rather  than  known  ; 
and  when  Adonijah  prepares  his  revolt, — for  another  en- 
emy now  sprang  up  in  David's  own  house, — to  Joab  he 
makes  his  overtures,2  having  observed  him,  no  doubt  to  be 
a  thorn  in  the  king's  side ;  nor  are  the  overtures  rejected  ; 
and  amongst  other  facts  developed  in  this  second  conspi- 
racy, it  incidentally  appears,  that  the  ordinary  dwelling- 
place  of  Joab  was  "  in  the  ivilderness  f*  as  if,  suspicious 
and  suspected,  a  house  within  the  walls  of  Jerusalem  was 
not  the  one  in  which  he  would  venture  to  lay  his  head. 
It  is  remarkable  that  this  formidable  traitor,  from  whose 
thraldom  David  in  the  flower  of  his  age,  and  the  splendor 

1  Kings  ii.  5.  M  Kings  i.  7.  3  lb.  ii.  34. 


154  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    II. 

of  his  military  renown,  could  never,  we  have  seen,  disen- 
gage himself,  fell  at  once,  and  whilst  whatever  popularity 
he  might  have  with  the  army  must  have  been  fresh  as 
ever,  before  the  arm  of  Solomon,  a  stripling,  if  not  a  beard- 
less boy ;  who,  taking  advantage  of  a  fresh  instance  of 
treachery  in  this  hardened  adventurer,  fearlessly  gave  com- 
mand to  "  fall  upon  him  and  bury  him,  that  he  might  thus 
take  away,"  as  he  said,  "the  innocent  blood  which  Joab 
shed,  from  him,  and  from  the  house  of  his  father ;  when 
he  fell  upon  two  men  more  righteous  and  better  than  him- 
self, and  slew  them  with  the  sword,  his  father  David  not 
knowing  thereof;  to  wit,  Abner,  the  son  of  Ner,  captain  of 
the  host  of  Israel,  and  Amasa,  the  son  of  Jether,  captain  of 
the  host  of  Judah.1  But  Solomon  had  as  yet  a  clear  con- 
science, which  David  had  forfeited  with  respect  to  Joab ; 
this  it  was  that  armed  the  youth  with  a  moral  courage 
which  his  father  had  once  known  what  it  was  to  have, 
when  he  went  forth  as  a  shepherd-boy  against  Goliath, 
and  which  he  afterwards  knew  what  it  was  to  want,  when 
he  crouched  before  Joab,  as  a  king.  So  true  it  is,  the 
"  wicked  flee  when  no  man  pursueth,  but  the  righteous  is 
bold  as  a  lion." 

And  now  can  any  say  that  God  winked  at  this  wicked- 
ness of  his  servant  ?  That  the  man  after  his  own  heart, 
for  such  in  the  main  he  was,  frail  as  he  proved  himself, 
sinned  grievously,  and  sinned  with  impunity  !  On  the 
contrary,  this  deed  was  the  pivot  upon  which  David's  for- 
tunes turned ;  that  done,  and  he  was  undone  ;  then  did 
God  raise  up  enemies  against  him  for  it  out  of  his  own 
house,  for  ':  the  thing,"  as  we  are  expressly  told,  "  displeased 
the  Lord  ;"2  thenceforward  the  days  of  his  years  became 
full  of  evil,  and  if  he  lived,  (for  the  Lord  caused  death  to 

»  1  Kings,  ii.  32.  2  2  Sam.  ii.  27;  xii.  11. 


PART  II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  155 

pass  from  himself  to  the  child,  by  a  vicarious  dispensation,1) 
it  was  to  be  a  king,  with  more  than  kingly  sorrows,  but 
with  little  of  kingly  power ;  to  be  banished  by  his  son  ; 
bearded  by  his  servant ;  betrayed  by  his  friends ;  deserted 
by  his  people  ;  bereaved  of  his  children  ;  and  to  feel  all,  all 
these  bitter  griefs,  bound,  as  it  were,  by  a  chain  of  compli- 
cated cause  and  effect,  to  this  one  great  original  transgres- 
sion. This  was  surely  no  escape  from  the  penalty  of  his 
crime,  though  it  was  still  granted  him  to  live  and  breathe 
— God  would  not  slay  even  Cain,  nor  suffer  others  to  slay 
him,  whose  punishment,  nevertheless,  was  greater  than  he 
could  bear — but  rather  it  was  a  lesson  to  him  and  to  us, 
how  dreadful  a  thing  it  is  to  tempt  the  Almighty  to  let 
loose  his  plagues  upon  us,  and  how  true  is  he  to  his  word, 
"  Vengeance  is  mine,  I  will  repay,"  saith  the  Lord. 

Meanwhile,  by  means  of  the  fall  of  David,  however  it 
may  have  caused  some  to  blaspheme,  God  may  have  also 
provided  in  his  mercy,  that  many  since  David  should  stand 
upright ;  the  frailty  of  one  may  have  prevented  the  mis- 
carriage of  thousands  ;  saints,  with  his  example  before  their 
eyes,  may  have  learned  to  walk  humbly,  and  so  to  walk 
surely,  when  they  might  otherwise  have  presumed  and  per- 
ished ;  and  sinners,  even  the  men  of  the  darkest  and  most 
deadly  sins,  may  have  been  saved  from  utter  desperation 
and  self-abandonment,  by  remembering  David  and  all  his 
trouble  ;  and  that,  deep  as  he  was  in  guilt,  he  was  not  so 
deep  but  that  his  bitter  cries  for  mercy,  under  the  remorse 
and  anguish  of  hie  spirit,  could  even  yet  pierce  the  ear  of 
an  offended  God,  and  move  him  to  put  away  his  sin. 

1  2  Sam.  xii.  13.  "p2Si"J. 


156  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    II. 


XI. 

My  subject  has  compelled  me  to  anticipate  some  of  the 
events  of  David's  history  according-  to  the  order  of  time. 
I  must  now,  therefore,  revert  to  certain  incidents  in  it, 
which  it  would  before  have  interrupted  my  argument  to 
notice,  but  which  are  too  important  as  evidences  of  its  cred- 
ibility, to  be  altogether  overlooked. 

The  conspiracy  of  Absalom  being-  now  organized,  it  only 
remained  to  try  the  issue  by  force  of  arms ;  and  here  an- 
other coincidence  presents  itself. 

In  the  seventeenth  chapter  of  the  second  Book  of  Sam- 
uel, we  read  that  "  David  arose,  and  all  the  people  that 
were  with  him,  and  they  passed  over  Jordan"  (v.  22  ;)  and 
in  the  same  chapter,  that  "  Absalom  passed  over  Jordan,  he 
and  all  the  men  of  Israel  with  him"  (v.  24  ;)  and  that 
"  they  pitched  in  the  land  of  Gilead"  (v.  26).  Now  in  the 
next  chapter,  where  an  account  is  given  of  a  review  of 
David's  troops,  and  of  their  going  forth  to  the  fight,  it  is 
said,  "  So  the  people  went  out  into  the  field  against  Israel, 
and  the  battle  was  in  the  wood  of  Epliraim"*  But  is 
not  the  sacred  historian,  in  this  instance,  off  his  guard,  and 
having  already  placed  his  combatants  on  one  side  of  the 
river,  does  he  not  now  place  his  combat  on  the  other  ?  Is 
he  not  mistaken  in  his  geography,  and  does  he  not  hereby 
betray  himself  and  the  credit  of  his  narrative  ?  Certain 
it  is,  that  Absalom  had  passed  over  Jordan  eastward,  and 
so  had  David,  with  their  respective  followers,  pitching  in 
Gilead  ;  and  no  less  certain  it  is,  that  the  tribe  of  Ephraim 
lay  altogether  west  of  Jordan,  and  had  not  a  foot  of  ground 
beyond  it :  how  then  was  the  battle  in  the  wood  of  Eph- 

'  2  Sam.  xviii.  6. 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  157 

raim  7  By  any  fabulous  writer  this  seeming  difficulty 
would  have  been  avoided,  or  care  would  have  been  taken 
that,  at  least,  it  should  be  explained.  But  the  Book  of 
Samuel,  written  by  one  familiar  with  the  events  he  de- 
scribes, and  with  the  scenes  in  which  they  occurred  ;  writ- 
ten, moreover,  in  the  simplicity  of  his  heart,  probably  with- 
out any  notion  that  his  veracity  could  be  called  in  ques- 
tion, or  that  he  should  ever  be  the  subject  of  suspicious 
scrutiny,  contents  itself  with  stating  the  naked  facts,  and 
then  leaves  it  to  the  critics  to  reconcile  them  as  they  can. 
Turn  we  then  to  the  twelfth  chapter  of  the  Book  of  Judges. 
There  we  are  told  of  an  attack  made  by  the  Ei)Jiraimites 
upon  Jephthah,  in  the  land  of  Gilead,  on  pretence  of  a 
wrong  done  them  when  they  were  not  invited  by  the  latter 
to  take  part  in  b.is  successful  invasion  of  Amnion.  It  was 
a  memorable  struggle.  Jephthah,  indeed,  endeavored  to 
soothe  the  angry  assailants  by  words  of  peace,  but  when 
he  spake  of  peace,  they  only  made  themselves  ready  for 
battle.  Accordingly,  "  he  gathered  together  all  the  men 
of  Gilead,  and  fought  with  Ephraim.''  Ephraim  was  dis- 
comfited with  signal  slaughter ;  those  who  fell  in  the  ac- 
tion, and  those  who  were  afterwards  put  to  death  upon 
the  test  of  the  word  Shibboleth,  amounting  to  forty-two 
thousand  men ;  almost  an  extinction  of  all  the  fighting 
men  of  Ephraim.  Now  an  event  so  singular,  and  so  san- 
guinary, was  not  likely  to  pass  away  without  a  memorial : 
and  what  memorial  so  natural  for  the  grave  of  a  tribe,  as 
its  own  name  forever  assigned  to  the  spot  where  it  fell, 
the  Acaldema  of  their  race  ? 

Thus,  then,  may  we  account  most  naturally  for  a  "  wood 
of  Ephraim"  in  the  land  of  Gilead  ;  a  point  which  would 
have  perplexed  us  not  a  little,  had  the  Book  of  Judges 
never  come  down  to  us,  or,  coming  down  to  us,  had  no 
mention  been  made  in  it  of  Jephthah's  victory  ;  and  though 

14 


15S  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    II. 

we  certainly  cannot  prove  that  the  battle  of  David  and 
Absalom  was  fought  on  precisely  the  same  field  as  this  of 
Jephthah  and  the  Ephraimites  some  hundred  and  twenty 
years  before,  yet  it  is  highly  probable  that  this  was  the 
case,  for  both  the  battles  were  assuredly  in  Gilead,  and 
both  apparently  in  that  part  of  Gilead  which  bordered  upon 
one  of  the  fords  of  Jordan. 

Thus  does  a  seeming  error  turn  out,  on  examination,  to 
be  an  actual  pledge  of  the  good  faith  of  the  historian  ;  and 
the  unconcern  with  which  he  tells  his  own  tale,  in  his  own 
way,  never  pausing  to  correct,  to  balance,  or  adjust,  to  sup- 
ply a  defect,  or  to  meet  an  objection,  is  the  conduct  of  a 
witness  to  whom  it  never  occurred  that  he  had  anything 
to  conceal,  or  anything  to  fear ;  or,  if  it  did  occur,  to  whom 
it  was  well  known  that  truth  is  mighty  and  will  prevail. 


XII. 

David  having  won  the  battle,  and  recovered  his  throne, 
prepares  to  repass  the  Jordan,  and  return  once  more  to  his 
capital.  His  friends  again  congregate  around  him,  for  the 
prosperous  have  many  friends.  Amongst  them,  however, 
were  some  who  had  been  true  to  him  in  the  day  of  his 
adversity;  and  the  aged  Barzillai,  a  Gileadite,  who  had 
provided  the  king  with  sustenance  whilst  he  lay  at  Maha- 
naiin,  and  when  his  affairs  were  critical,  presents  himself 
before  him.  He  had  won  David's  heart.  The  king  now 
entreats  him  to  accompany  him  to  his  court,  "Come  thou 
over  with  me,  and  I  will  feed  thee  with  me  in  Jerusalem." 
But  the  unambitious  Barzillai  pleads  fourscore  years  as  a 
bar  against  beginning  the  life  of  a  courtier,  and  chooses 
rather  to  die  in  his  own  city,  and  be  buried  by  the  grave 
of  his  father  and   of  his  mother.     His  son,  however,  had 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  159 

life  before  him :  "  Behold  thy  servant  Chimham,  let  him 
go  over  with  my  lord  the  king :  and  do  to  him  what  shall 
seem  good  unto  thee."     And  the  king  answered,  Chimham 
shall  go  over  with  me,  and  I  will  do  to  him  that  which 
shall  seem  good  unto  thee."1     So  he  went  with  the  king. 
Thus  begins,  and  thus  ends  the  history  of  Chimham  ;  he 
passes  away  from  the  scene,  and  what  David  did  for  him, 
or  whether  he  did  anything  for  him,  beyond  providing  him 
a  place  at  his  table,  and  recommending  him,  in  common 
with  many  others,  to  Solomon  before  he  died,  does  not 
appear.     Singular,  however,  it  is,  and  if  ever  there  was  a 
coincidence  which  carried  with  it  the  stamp  of  truth,  it  is 
this,  that  in  the  forty-first  chapter  of  Jeremiah,  an  histori- 
cal chapter,  in  which  an  account  is  given  of  the  murder 
of  Gedaliah,  the  officer  whom  Nebuchadnezzar  had  left  in 
charge  of  Judea,  as  its  governor,  when  he  carried  away 
the  more  wealthy  of  its  inhabitants  captive  to  Babylon,  we 
read  that  the  Jews,  fearing  for  the  consequences  of  this 
bloody  act.  and  apprehending  the  vengeance  of  the  Chal- 
deans, prepared  for  a  flight  into  Egypt,  so  "  the)'  departed," 
the  narrative  continues,  "and  dwelt  in  the  habitation  of 
Chimham,  which  is  by  Bethlehem,  to  go  to  enter  into 
Egypt"  (v.  17).     It  is  impossible  to  imagine  anything  more 
incidental  than  the  mention  of  this  estate  near  Bethlehem, 
which  was  the  habitation  of  Chimham — yet  how  well  doe? 
it  tally  with  the  spirit  of  David's  speech  to  Barzillai,  some 
four  hundred  years  before  !  for  what  can  be  more  probable 
than  that  David,  whose  birth-place  was  this  very  Beth- 
lehem, and  whose  patrimony  in  consequence  lay  there, 
having  undertaken  to  provide  for  Chimham,  should  have 
bestowed  it  in  whole,  or  in  part,  as  the  most  flattering  re- 
ward he  could  confer,  a  personal,  as  well  as  a  royal,  mark 

1  2  Sam.  xii.  37. 


160  THE    VERACITY    OF   THE  PART    II. 

of  favor,  on  the  son  of  the  man  who  had  saved  his  life,  and 
the  lives  of  his  followers  in  the  hour  of  their  distress ;  and 
that,  to  that  very  day,  when  Jeremiah  wrote,  it  should  have 
remained  in  the  possession  of  the  family  of  Chimham,  and 
have  been  a  land  called  after  his  own  name  ? 


XIII. 

I  proceed  with  the  history  of  David,  in  which  we  can 
scarcely  advance  a  step  without  having  our  attention 
drawn  to  some  new,  though  perhaps  subtle,  incident,  which 
marks  at  once  the  reality  of  the  facts,  and  the  fidelity  of 
the  record.  No  doubt  the  surface  of  the  narrative  is  per- 
fectly satisfactory  :  but  beneath  the  surface,  there  is  a  cer- 
tain substratum  now  appearing,  and  presently  losing  itself 
again,  which  is  the  proper  field  of  my  inquiry.  Here  I  find 
the  true  material  of  which  I  am  in  search;  coincidences 
shy  and  unobtrusive,  not  courting  notice — as  far  from  it  as 
possible — but  having  chanced  to  attract  it,  sustaining  not 
only  notice,  but  scrutiny ;  such  matters  as  might  be  over- 
looked on  a  cursory  perusal  of  the  text  a  hundred  times, 
and  which  indeed  would  stand  very  little  chance  of  any 
other  fate  than  neglect,  unless  the  mind  of  the  reader  had 
been  previously  put  upon  challenging  them  as  they  pass. 
Therefore  it  is  that  I  feel  often  incapable  of  doing  justice  to 
my  subject  with  my  readers,  however  familiar  they  may 
be  with  Holy  Writ.  The  full  force  of  the  argument  can 
only  be  felt  by  him  who  pursues  it  for  himself,  when  he  is 
in  his  chamber  and  is  still;  his  assent  taken  captive  before 
he  is  aware  of  it ;  his  doubts,  if  any  he  had.  melting  away 
under  the  continual  >h-o;>/nng-  of  minute  particles  of  evi- 
dence upon  his  mind,  as  it  proceeds  in  its  investigation.  It 
is  difficult,  it  is  scarcely  possible,  to  impart  this  sympathy 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  161 

to  the  reader.     And  even  when  I  can  grasp  an  incident 
sufficiently  substantial  to  detach  and  present  to  his  consid- 
eration, I  still  am  conscious  that  it  is  not  launched  to  ad- 
vantage ;  that  a  thousand  little  preparations  are  lacking  in 
order  that  it  may  leave  the  slips  (if  I  may  venture  upon  the 
expression)  with  a  motion  that  shall  make  it  win  its  way ; 
that  the  plunge  with  which  I  am  compelled  to  let  it  fall! 
provokes  a  reliance  to  which  it  does  not  deserve  to  be  ex- 
posed.    I  proceed,  however,  with  the  history  of  David,  and 
to  a  passage  in  it  which  has  partly  suggested  these  remarks 
When  Saul  in  his  fury  had  slain,  by  the  hand  of  Doe- 
Ahimelech  the  high-priest,  and  all  the  priests  of  the  Lord! 
"  one  of  the  sons  of  Ahimelech,"  we  read,  «  named  Abiathar' 
escaped  and  fled  after  David."'    David  received  him  kindly' 
saying  unto  him,  «  Abide  thou  with  mc,  fear  not;  for  he' 
that  seeketh  my  life,  seeketh  thy  life  ;  but  with  me  thou 
shall  be  in  safeguard."     Abiathar  had  brought  with  him 
the  ephod,  the  high-priest's  mysterious  scarf;  and  hia  fa- 
ther being  dead,  he  appears  to  have  been  made  high-priest 
in  his  stead,  so  far  as  David  had  it  then   in  his  power  to 
give  him  that  office,  and  to  have  attended  upon  him  and 
his  followers.*     These  particulars  we  gather  from  several 
passages  of  the  first  Book  of  Samuel. 

We  hear  now  nothing  more  of  Abiathar  (except  that  he 
was  confirmed  in  his  office,  together  with  a  colleague,  when 
David  was  established  in  his  kingdom)  for  nearly  thirty 
years.  Then  he  re-appears,  having  to  play  not  an  incon- 
spicuous part  in  David's  councils,  on  occasion  of  the  re- 
be  ion  of  Absalom.  Now  here  we  find,  that  though  he  is 
still  in  his  office  of  priest,  Zadok  (the  colleague  to  whom  I 
alluded)  appears  to  have  obtained  the  first  place  in  the 
confidence  and  consideration  of  David.     When  David  sends 

•lSam.xiii.20.  •  I  Sam.  xxx.  7. 

14* 


162  THE    VERACITY    OP   THE  PART    II. 

the  Ark  back,  which  he  probably  thought  it  irreverent  to 
make  the  partner  of  his  flight,  and  delivers  his  commands 
to  this  effect,  it  may  be  remarked  that  he  does  not  address 
himself  to  Abiathar,  though  Abiathar  was  there,  but  to 
Zadok — Zadok  takes  the  lead  in  everything.  The  king 
says  to  Zadok,  "Carry  back  the  Ark  of  God  into  the 
city  :"' — and  again,  "  The  king  said  unto  Zadok  the  priest, 
Art  not  thou  a  seer?  return  into  the  city  in  peace;"  and 
when  Zadok  and  Abiathar  are  mentioned  together  at  this 
period,  Zadok  is  placed  foremost.  No  doubt  Abiathar 
was  honored  by  David  ;  there  is  evidence  enough  of  this 
(v.  35  ;)  but  many  trifles  lead  us  to  conclude  that  herein  he 
attained  not  unto  his  companion. 

Now,  unquestionably,  it  cannot  be  asserted  with  confi- 
dence, where  there  is  no  positive  document  to  substantiate 
the  assertion,  that.  Abiathar  felt  his  associate  in  the  priest- 
hood to  be  his  rival  in  the  state,  his  more  than  successful 
rival ;  yet  that  such  a  feeling  should  find  a  place  in  the 
breast  of  Abiathar  seems  most  natural,  seems  almost  inev- 
itable, when  we  take  into  account  that  these  two  priests 
were  the  representatives  of  two  rival  houses,  over  one  of 
which,  a  prophecy  affecting  its  honor,  and  well  nigh  its  ex- 
istence, was  hanging  unfulfilled.  For  Zadoc,  be  it  ob- 
served, was  descended  from  Eleazar,  the  eldest  of  the  sons 
of  Aaron ;  Abiathar  from  Ithamar,  the  youngest,  and  so 
from  the  family  of  Eli,  a  family  of  which  it  had  been  fore- 
told, some  hundred  and  fifty  years  before,  that  the  priest- 
hood should  pass  from  it.  Could  Abiathar  read  the  signs 
of  his  time  without  alarm?  or  fail  to  suspect  (what  did 
prove  the  fact)  that  the  curse  which  had  tarried  so  long, 
was  now  again  in  motion,  and  that  the  ancient  office  of  his 
fathers  was  in  jeopardy  ;  a  curse,  too,  comprising  circum- 

♦       >  2  Sam.  xv.  25. 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  163 

stances  of  signal  humiliation,  calculated  beyond  measure  to 
exasperate  the  sufferer  :  even  that  the  house  of  Eli,  which 
God  had  once  said  should  walk  before  him  forever,  should 
be  far  from  him  ;  even  that  he  would  raise  up  (that  is  from 
another  house)  a  faithful  priest  that  should  do  according  to 
that  which  was  in  his  heart  and  his  mind  ;  and  that  the 
house  of  that  man  should  be  sure  built ;  and  that  they  of 
the  house  of  Eli  which  were  left,  ':  should  come  and  crouch 
to  him  for  a  piece  of  silver  and  a  morsel  of  bread,  and  say, 
Put  me,  I  pray  thee,  into  one  of  the  priest's  offices,  that  I 
may  eat  a  piece  of  bread  ?'"  Abiathar  must  have  had  a 
tamer  spirit  than  he  gave  subsequent  proof  of,  if  he  could 
have  witnessed  the  elevation  of  one  in  whom  this  bitter 
threat  seemed  advancing  to  its  accomplishment,  and  in 
whom  it  was  in  fact  accomplished,  with  complacency  ;  if 
he  could  see  him  seated  by  his  side  in  the  dignity  of  the 
high-priesthood,  and  favored  at  his  expense  by  the  more 
frequent  smiles  of  his  sovereign,  without  a  wounded  spirit. 
Now  having  possessed  ourselves  of  this  secret  key, 
namely,  jealousy  of  his  rival,  a  key  -not  delivered  into 
our  hands  directly  by  the  historian,  but  accidentally  found 
by  ourselves,  (and  here  is  its  value,)  let  us  apply  it  to  the 
incidents  of  Abiathar's  subsequent  conduct,  and  observe 
whether  they  will  not  answer  to  it.  We  have  seen  Abia- 
thar Hying  from  the  vengeance  of  Saul  to  David  ;  pro- 
tected by  David  in  the  wilderness  ;  made  by  David  his 
priest,  virtually  before  Saul's  death,2  and  formally  when 
he  succeeded  to  Saul's  throne.3  We  have  seen,  too,  Za- 
dok  united  with  him  in  his  office,  and  David  giving  signs 
of  preferring  Zadok  before  him ;  a  preference  the  more 
marked,  and  the  more  galling,  because  Abiathar  was  un- 

»  1  Sam.  ii.  3&  2  1  Sam.  niii.  2—6.  3  2  Sam.  viii.  17. 


164  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    II. 

doubtedly  the  high-priest  (as  the  sequel  will  prove)  and 
Zadok  his  vicar  only,  or  sagan.1 

This  being  the  state  of  things,  let  us  now  observe  the 
issue.  When  David  was  forced  to  withdraw  for  a  season 
from  Jerusalem,  by  the  conspiracy  of  Absalom,  Zadok 
and  Abiathar  were  left  behind  in  the  capital,  charged 
with  the  office  of  forwarding  to  the  king  any  intelligence 
which  his  friends  within  the  walls  might  communicate  to 
them,  that  it  was  for  his  advantage  to  know.  Ahimaaz, 
the  son  of  Zadok,  and  Jonathan,  the  son  of  Abiathar,  (the. 
sons  are  named  after  the  same  order  as  their  fathers,)  are 
the  secret  messengers  by  whom  it  is  to  be  conveyed  ;  and 
on  one  occasion,  the  only  one  in  which  their  services  are 
recorded,  we  find  them  acting  together.2  But  I  observe 
that  after  the  battle  in  which  Absalom  was  slain,  a  battle 
which  seems  to  have  served  as  a  test  of  the  real  loyalty  of 
many  of  David's  nominal  friends,  Ahimaaz,  the  son  of 
Zadok,  and  not  Jonathan,  the  son  of  Abiathar,  is  at  hand 
to  carry  the  tidings  of  the  victory  to  David,  who  had  tar- 
ried behind  at  Mahanaim  ;  and  this  office  he  solicits  from 
Joab,  who  had  intended  it  for  another,  with  the  utmost 
importunity,  and  the  most  lively  zeal  for  the  king's  cause.3 
This,  it  will  be  said,  proves  but  little;  more  especially  as 
there  is  reason  to  believe  that  David  was,  at  least,  upon 
terms  with  Abiathar  at  a  later  period  than  this.4  Still 
there  may  be  thought  something  suspicious  in  the  absence 
of  the  one  messenger,  at  a  moment  so  critical,  as  compared 
with  the  alacrity  of  the  other  ;  their  office  having  been 
hitherto  a  joint  one;  it  is  not  enough  to  prove  that  the 
loyalty  of  Abiathar  and  his  house  was  waxing  cool, 
though  it  accords  with  such  a  supposition.  Let  us,  how- 
ever, proceed.     Within  a  few  years  of  this  time,  probably 

i  See  Lightfoot's  Works,  Vol.  i.  911,  912,  fol.  2  2  Sam.  xvih.  21. 

»  lb.  xviii.  19—22.  *  lb.  xix.  11. 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  165 

about  eight,  another  rebellion  against  David  is  set  on  foot 
by  another  of  his  sons.  Adonijah  is  now  the  offender.  He, 
too,  prepares  him  chariots  and  horsemen,  after  the  exam- 
ple of  his  brother.  Moreover,  he  feels  his  way  before  he 
openly  appears  in  arms.  And  to  whom  does  he  make  his 
first  overtures?  "  He  confers,"  we  read,  "  with  Abiathaf 
the  priest,"1  having  good  reason,  no  doubt,  for  knowing 
that  such  an  application  might  be  made  in  that  quarter 
with  safety,  if  not  with  success.  The  event  proved  that 
he  had  not  mistaken  his  man.  "  Abiathar,"  we  learn, 
u  following  Adonijah,  helped  him  :"  not  so  Zadok  ;  he, 
we  are  told,  "was  not  with  Adonijah  ;"  on  the  contrary, 
he  was  one  of  the  first  persons  for  whom  David  sent,  that 
he  might  communicate  with  him  in  this  emergency  ;  his 
stanch  and  steadfast  friend  ;  and  him  he  commissioned, 
together  with  Nathan  the  prophet,  to  set  the  crown  upon 
the  head  of  Solomon,  and  thereby  to  confound  the  coun- 
cils of  the  rebels.'2  Nor  should  we  leave  unnoticed,  for 
they  are  facts  which  coincide  with  the  view  I  have  taken 
of  Abiathar's  loyalty,  and  the  cause  of  it,  that  one  of  the 
first  acts  of  Solomon's  reign  was  to  banish  the  traitor  "  to 
his  own  fields,"  and  to  thrust  him  out  of  the  priesthood, 
"  that  he  might  fulfil"  (so  it  is  expressly  said  in  the  twenty- 
seventh  verse  of  the  second  chapter  of  the  first  Book  of 
Kings)  "  the  word  of  the  Lord,  which  he  spake  concerning 
the  house  of  Eli  in  Shiloh," — rfulfil  it.  not  by  that  act  only, 
but  by  the  other  also,  which  followed  and  crowned  the 
prophecy;  for  "  Zadok  the  priest,"  it  is  added,  "did  Sol- 
omon put  in  the  room  of  Abiathar  f'3  or,  as  the  Septua 
gint  translates  it  still  more  to  our  purpose,  Zadok  the  priest 
did  the  king  make  first  priest  (eis  let{ia  n^5To*)in  the  room 
of  Abiathar ;  so  that  Abiathar,  as  I  said,  had  been  hith- 

i  1  Kings  l.  7.  a  lb.  i.  32,  34.  s  lb.  ii.  35. 


166  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART  II. 

erto  Zadok's  superior ;  his  superior  in  office,  and  his  infe- 
rior in  honor ;  a  position  of  all  others  calculated  to  excite 
in  him  the  heart-burnings  \vc  have  discovered,  long  smoth- 
ered, but  at  last  bursting  forth — beginning  in  lukewarm- 
ness,  and  ending  in  rebellion. 

This  is  all  extremely  natural ;  nothing  can  drop  into  its 
place  better  than  the  several  parts  of  this  history ;  not  at 
all  a  prominent  history,  but  rather  a  subordinate  one.  Yet 
manifest  as  the  relation  which  they  bear  to  one  another  is, 
when  they  are  once  brought  together,  they  are  themselves 
dispersed  through  the  Books  of  Samuel,  of  Kings,  and  of 
Chronicles,  without  the  smallest  arrangement  or  reference 
one  to  another ;  their  succession  not  continuous  ;  suspend- 
ed by  many  and  long  intervals  ;  intervals  occupied  by 
matters  altogether  foreign  from  this  subject ;  and  after  all, 
the  integral  portions  of  the  narrative  themselves  defective : 
there  are  gaps  even  here,  which  I  think,  indeed,  may  be 
filled  up,  as  I  have  shown,  with  very  little  chance  of  error ; 
but  still,  that  there  should  be  any  necessity  even  for  this, 
argues  the  absence  of  all  design,  collusion,  and  contrivance 
in  the  historians. 


XIV. 

We  have  now  followed  David  through  the  events  of  his 
checkered  life  ;  it  remains  to  contemplate  him  yet  once 
more  upon  his  death-bed,  giving  in  charge  the  execution 
of  his  list,  wishes  to  Solomon  his  son.  Probably  in  con- 
sideration of  his  youth,  his  inexperience,  and  the  difficul- 
ties of  his  position,  David  thought  il  well  to  put  him  in 
possesion  of  the  characters  of  some  of  those  with  whom 
he  would  have  to  deal  ;  of  those  whom  he  had  found  faith- 
ful or  faithless  to  himself;  that,  on  the  one  hand,  his  own 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  167 

promises  of  favor  might  not  be  forfeited,  nor,  on  the  other, 
the  confidence  of  the  young  monarch  be  misplaced.  Now 
it  is  remarkable,  that  in  this  review  of  his  friends  and  foes,' 
David  altogether  overlooks  Mephibosheth,  the  son  of  Jona- 
than. Joab  he  remembers,  and  all  that  he  had  done  : 
Shimei  he  speaks  of  at  some  length,  and  puts  Solomon 
upon  his  guard  against  him.  The  sons  of  Barzillai,  and 
the  service  they  had  rendered  him  in  the  day  of  his  ad- 
versity, are  all  recommended  to  his  friendly  consideration  ; 
but  of  Mephibosheth,  who  had  played  a  part,  such  as  it 
was,  in  the  scenes  of  those  eventful  times,  which  had 
called  forth,  for  good  or  evil,  a  Chimham,  a  Barzillai,  a 
Shimei,  and  a  Joab,  he  does  not  say  a  syllable.  Yet  he 
was  under  peculiar  obligations  to  him.  He  had  loved  his 
father  Jonathan.  He  had  promised  to  show  kindnes  to  his 
house  forever.  He  had  confirmed  his  promise  by  an  oath. 
That  oath  he  had  repeated.1  On  his  accession  to  the 
throne  he  had  evinced  no  disposition  to  shrink  from  it ;  on 
the  contrary,  he  had  studiously  inquired  after  the  family 
of  Jonathan,  and  having  found  Mephibosheth,  he  gave 
him  a  place  at  his  own  table  continually,  for  his  father's 
sake,  and  secured  to  him  all  the  lands  of  Saul."2 

Let  us,  however,  carefully  examine  the  details  of  the 
history,  and  I  think  we  shall  be  able  to  account  satisfac- 
torily enough  for  David's  apparent  neglect  of  the  son  of 
his  friend ;  for  I  think  we  shall  find  violent  cause  to  sus- 
pect that  Mephibosheth  had  forfeited  all  claims  to  hie 
kindness. 

When  David  was  driven  from  Jerusalem  by  the  rebellion 
of  Absalom,  no  Mephibosheth  appeared  to  share  with  him 
his  misfortunes,  or  to  support  him  by  his  name,  a  name  at 
that  moment  of  peculiar  value  to  David,  for  Mephibosheth 

1  1  Sam.  ii.  17.  8  2  Sam.  i.  6.  7. 


168  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  1JART    II. 

was  the  representative  of  the  house  of  Saul.  David  nat- 
urally intimates  some  surprise  at  his  absence  ;  and  when 
his  servant  Ziba  appears,  bringing  with  him  a  small  pres- 
ent of  bread  and  fruits,  (the  line  of  the  king's  flight  having 
apparently  carried  him  near  the  lands  of  Mephibosheth,)  a 
present,  however,  offered  on  his  own  part,  and  not  on  the 
part  of  his  master,  David  puts  to  him  several  questions, 
expressive  of  his  suspicions  of  Mephibosheth's  loyalty  : 
"  What  meanest  thou  by  these  ?  Where  is  thy  master's 
son?"1  Ziba  replies  in  substance,  than  he  had  tarried  at 
Jerusalem,  waiting  the  event  of  the  rebellion,  and  hoping 
that  it  might  lead  to  the  re-establishment  of  Saul's  family 
on  the  throne.  This  might  be  true,  or  it  might  be  false. 
The  commentators  appear  to  take  for  granted  that  it  was 
a  mere  slander  of  Ziba,  invented  for  the  purpose  of  sup- 
planting Mephibosheth  in  his  possessions.  I  do  not  think 
this  so  certain.  Ziba,  I  suspect,  had  some  reason  in  what 
he  said,  though  probably  the  coloring  of  the  picture  was 
his  own.  Certain  it  is,  or  all  but  certain,  that  the  tribe  of 
Benjamin,  which  was  the  tribe  of  Mephibosheth.  did,  in 
general,  take  part  with  the  rebels.  When  David  returned 
victorious,  and  Shimei  hastened  to  make  his  peace  with 
him,  a  thousand  men  of  Benjamin  accompanied  him ;  and 
it  was  his  boast  that  he  came  the  first  of  "  all  the  house 
of  Joseph"  to  meet  the  king,2  as  though  others  of  his  tribe 
(for  they  of  Benjamin  were  reckoned  of  the  house  of 
Joseph,  the  same  mother  having  given  birth  to  both)  were 
yet  behind.  Went  not  then  the  heart  of  Mephibosheth  in 
the  day  of  battle  with  his  brethren,  rather  than  with  his 
benefactor  ?  David  himself  evidently  believed  the  report 
of  Ziba,  and  forthwith  gave  him  his  master's  inheritance.' 
The  battle  is  now  fought,  on  which  the  fate  of  the  throne 

i  2  Sam.  xvi.  2,  3.  2  lb.  xix.  17—20.  »  lb.  xvi.  4. 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  169 

hung  in  suspense,  and  David  is  the  conqueror.  And  now, 
many  who  had  forsaken,  or  insulted  him  in  his  distress, 
hasten  to  congratulate  him  on  his  triumph,  and  to  profess 
their  joy  at  his  return ;  Mephibosheth  amongst  the  rest 
There  is  something  touching  in  David's  first  greeting  of 
him  ;  ';  Wherefore  wentest  thou  not  with  me,  Mephibo- 
sheth?" A  cpjestion  not  of  curiosity,  but  of  reproach. 
His  ass  was  saddled,  forsooth,  that  he  might  go,  but  Ziba, 
it  seems,  had  taken  it  for  himself,  and  gone  unto  the  king, 
and  slandered  him  unto  the  king  ;  and  meanwhile,  "  thy 
servant,  was  lame."  The  tale  appears  to  be  as  lame  as 
the  tale-bearer.  I  think  it  clear  that  Mephibosheth  did 
not  succeed  in  removing  the  suspicion  of  his  disloyalty 
from  David's  mind,  notwithstanding  the  ostentatious  dis- 
play of  his  clothes  unwashed  and  beard  un trimmed  ; 
weeds  which  the  loss  of  his  estate  might  very  well  have 
taught  him  to  put  on  :  for  otherwise,  would  not  David,  in 
common  justice  both  to  Mephibosheth  and  to  Ziba,  have 
punished  the  treachery  of  the  latter — the  lie  by  which  he 
had  imposed  upon  the  king  to  his  own  profit,  and  to  his 
master's  infinite  dishonor  and  damage,  by  revoking  alto- 
gether the  grant  of  the  lands  which  he  had  made  him, 
under  an  impression  which  proved  to  be  a  mistake,  and 
restoring-  them  to  their  rightful  owner,  who  had  been  in- 
juriously  supposed  to  have  forfeited  them  by  treason  to  the 
crown  ?  He  does,  however,,  no  such  thing.  To  Mephibo- 
sheth, indeed,  he  gives  back  half,  but  that  is  all ;  and  he 
leaves  the  other  half  still  in  the  possession  of  Ziba  ;  doing 
even  thus  much,  in  all  probability,  not  as  an  act  of  justice, 
but  out  of  tenderness  to  a  son,  even  an  unworthy  son  of 
Jonathan,  whom  he  had  loved  as  his  own  soul.  And 
then,  as  if  impatient  of  the  wearisome  exculpations  of  an 
ungrateful  man,  whose  excuses  were  his  accusations,  he 
abruptly  puts  an  end  to  the  parley,  (the  conversation  hav- 

15 


170  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    II. 

ing  been  apparently  much  longer  than  is  recorded,)  with  a 
"  Why  spcakest  thou  any  more  of  thy  matters  ?  I  have 
said,  Thou  and  Ziba  divide  the  land."1 

Henceforward,  whatever  act  of  grace  he  received  at 
David's  hands,  was  purely  gratuitous.  His  unfaithfulness 
had  released  the  king  from  his  bond  ;  and  that  he  lived, 
was  perhaps  rather  of  sufferance,  than  of  right ;  a  consid- 
eration which  serves  to  explain  David's  conduct  towards 
him,  as  it  is  reported  on  an  occasion  subsequent  to  the  re- 
bellion. For  when  propitiation  was  to  be  made  by  seven 
of  Saul's  sons,  for  the  sin  of  Saul  in  the  slaughter  of  the 
Gibeonites.  '-'the  king,"  we  read,  "spared  Mephibosheth, 
the  son  of  Jonathan,  the  son  of  Saul,  because  of  the  Lord's 
oath  that  was  between  them,  between  David,  and  Jona- 
than the  son  of  Saul;"2  as  though  he  owed  it  to  the  oath 
only,  and  to  the  memory  of  his  father's  virtues,  that  he 
was  not  selected  by  David  as  one  of  the  victims  of  that 
bloody  sacrifice. 

Now,  under  these  circumstances,  is  it  a  subject  for  sur- 
prise, is  it  not  rather  a  most  natural  and  veracious  coinci- 
dence, that  David,  in  commending  on  his  death-bed  some 
of  his  stanch  and  trustworthy  friends  to  Solomon  his  son, 
should  have  omitted  all  mention  of  Mephibosheth,  dissatis- 
fied as  he  was,  and  ever  had  been,  with  his  explanations 
of  very  suspicious  conduct,  at  a  very  critical  hour?  con- 
sidering him,  with  every  appearance  of  reason,  a  waiter 
upon  Providence,  as  such  parsons  have  been  since  called — 
a  prudent  man,  who  would  see  which  way  the  battle  went, 
before  he  made  up  his  mind  to  which  side  he  belonged? 
This  coincidence  is  important,  not  merely  as  carrying  with 
it  evidence  of  a  true  story  in  all  its  details,  which  is  my 
business  with  it ;  but  also  as  disembarrassing  the  incident 

*  2  Sam.  xix.  29.  2  lb.  xxi.  7. 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  171 

itself  of  several  serious  difficulties  which  present  themselves, 
on  the  ordinary  supposition  of  Ziha's  treachery,  and  Me- 
phibosheth's  truth  ;  difficulties  which  I  cannot  better  ex- 
plain, than  by  referring  my  hearers  to  the  beautiful  "  Con- 
templations" of  Bishop  Hall,  whose  view  of  these  two  char 
acters  is  the  common  one,  and  who  consequently  finds  him- 
self, in  this  instance,  (it  will  be  perceived,)  encumbered 
with  his  subject,  and  driven  to  the  necessity  of  impugning 
the  justice  of  David.  It  is  further  valuable,  as  exonerating 
the  king  of  two  other  charges  which  have  been  brought 
against  him,  yet.  more  serious  than  the  last,  even  of  indiffer- 
ence to  the  memory  of  his  dearest  friend,  and  disregard  to 
the  obligations  of  his  solemn  oath.  But  these  arc  not  the 
only  instances  in  which  the  character  of  David,  and  indeed 
of  the  history  itself,  which  treats  of  him,  has  suffered  from 
a  neglect  to  make  allowance  for  omissions  in  a  very  brief 
and  desultory  memoir,  or  from  a  want  of  more  exact  at- 
tention to  the  under-current  of  the  narrative,  which  would, 
in  itself,  very  often  supply  those  omissions. 


XV. 

The  history  of  the  people  of  God  has  thus  far  been 
brought  down  to  the  reign  of  Solomon,  and  its  general 
truth  and  accuracy  (I  think  I  may  say)  established  by  the 
application  of  a  test  which  could  scarcely  fail  us.  The 
great  schism  of  the  tribes  is  now  about  to  divide  our  atten- 
tion between  the  kingdoms  of  Israel  and  Judah  ;  but  be- 
fore I  proceed  to  offer  some  observations  upon  the  effects  of 
it,  both  religious  and  political,  on  either  kingdom,  observa- 
tions which  will  involve  many  more  of  those  undesigned 
coincidences  which  are  the  subject  of  these  pages,  I  must 
say  a  word  upon  the  progress  of  events  towards  the  schism 


172  THE    VERACITY   OF    THE  PART  II. 

itself;  for  herein  I  discover  combinations,  of  a  kind  which 
no  ingenuity  could  possibly  counterfeit,  and  to  an  extent 
which  verifies  a  large  portion  of  the  Jewish  annals.     "  By 
faith,  Jacob,  when  he  was  a  dying,  blessed  his  children." 
On  that  occasion,  Judah  and  Ephraim  were  made  to  stand 
conspicuous  amongst  the  future  founders  of  the  Israelitish 
nation.     "Judah,"  says  the  prophetic  old  man,  "thou  art 
he  whom  thy  brethren  shall  praise ;  thy  hand  shall  be  on 
the  neck  of  thine  enemies  :  thy  father's  children  shall  bow 
down  before  thee.     Judah  is  a  lion's  whelp :  from  the  prey, 
my  son,  thou  art  gone  up.     He  stooped  down,  he  crouched 
as  a  lion,  and  as  an  old  lion:  who  shall  rouse  him  up? 
The  sceptre  shall  not  depart  from  Judah,  nor  a  lawgiver 
from  between  his  feet,  till  Shiloh  come  ;  and  unto  him  shall 
the  gathering  of  the  people  be."1     All  this,  and  more,  did 
Jacob  foretell  of  this  mighty  tribe.     Again,  crossing   his 
hands,  and  studiously  laying  the  right  upon  the  head  of 
Ephraim,  the  younger  of  Joseph's  children,  "Manasseh 
also  shall  be  a  people,"  he  exclaimed,  li  and  he  also  shall 
be  great ;  but  truly  his  younger  brother  shall  be  greater 
than  he,  and  his  seed  shall  become  a  multitude  of  nations. 
And  so  he  blessed  them  that  day,  saying,  In  thee  shall 
Israel  bless,  saying,  God  make  thee  as  Epliraim  and  Ma- 
nasseh."2    Thus  did  these  two  tribes,  Judah  and  Epliraim, 
enter  the  land  of  promise  some  two  hundred  and  forty 
years  afterwards,  with  the  Patriarch's  blessing  on    their 
heads  :  God  having  conveyed  it  to  them  by  his  mouth,  and 
being  now  about  to  work  it  out  by  the  quiet  operations  of 
his  bauds.      As  yet,  neither  of  them  was  much  more  pow- 
erful than  his  brethren,  the  latter  less  so;  Judah  not  ex- 
ceeding one  other  of  the  tribes,  at  least,  by   more   than 
twelve  thousand  men,  and  Ephraim  actually  the  smallest 

I  Gen.  xlix.  8.  2  lb.  xlix.  20. 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES. 


173 


of  them  all,  with  the  single  exception  of  Simeon.1  The 
lot  of  Ephraim,  however,  fell  upon  a  fair  ground,  and  upon 
this  lot,  the  disposing  of  which  was  of  the  Lord,  turned 
very  materially  the  fortunes  of  Ephraim ;  it  fell  nearly  in 
the  midst  of  the  tribes  ;  and  accordingly,  the  invasion  and 
occupation  of  Canaan  being  effected,  at  Shiloh  in  Ephraim, 
the  Tabernacle  was  set  up.  there  to  abide  three  hundred 
years  and  upwards,  during  all  the  time  of  the  Judges.* 
Hither,  we  read,  Elkanah  repaired  year  by  year  for  wor- 
ship and  sacrifice ;  here  the  lamp  of  God  was  never  suffered 
to  go  out  "in  the  Temple  of  the  Lord,"  (the  expression  is 
remarkable,)  "  where  the  Ark  of  God  was  ;,;3  here  Samuel 
ministered  as  a  child,  all  Israel,  from  Dan  even  to  Beer- 
sheba,  speedily  perceiving  that  he  was  established  to  be  a 
prophet,  because  all  Israel  was  accustomed  to  resort  annually 
to  Shiloh,  at  the  feasts.4  Shiloh,  therefore,  in  Ephraim, 
was  the  great  religious  capital,  as  it  were,  from  the  time 
of  Joshua  to  Saul,  the  spot  more  especially  consecrated  to 
the  honor  of  God,  the  resting  place  of  his  tabernacle,  of  his 
prophets,  and  of  bis  priests  ;3  whilst  at  no  great  distance 
from  il  appears  to  have  stood  Shechemf  once  the  political 
capital  of  Ephraim,  till  civil  war  left  it  for  a  season  in 
ruins,  but  which,  even  then,  continued  to  be  the  gathering 
point  of  the  tribes  ;7  Shechem,  where  was  Jacob's  well,8  and 
where,  accordingly,  both  literally  and  figuratively,  was  the 
prophecy  of  that  patriarch  fulfilled,  "  Joseph  is  a  fruitful 
bough,  even  a  fruitful  bough  by  a  well,  whose  branches 
run  over  the  wall."9 

Thus  was  this  district  in  Ephraim,  comprising  Shiloh 

i  Numb.  xxvi.  2  Judges  xxi.  19.  3  1  Sam.  iii.  3. 

<  lb.  iii.  20,  21.  5  Psalm  cxxxii.  6;  lxxviii.  67.     1  Sara.  ii.  14. 

8  Judges  xxi.   19.     Josh.  xxiv.  25,  26. 

7  Josh.  xxiv.  1.     Judges  ix.  2.     1  Kings  xii.  1.         8  John  iv.  6. 
»  See  Lighttbot.  Vol.  1.  49,  fol. 

15* 


174      >  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    II. 

and  Shechem,  probably  the  most  populous,  certainly  the 
most  important,  of  any  in  all  the  Holy  Land  during  the 
government  of  the  Judges  :  and,  constantly  recruited  by 
the  confluence  of  strangers,  Ephraim  seems,  to  have  be- 
come (as  Jerusalem  became  afterwards)  what  Jacob  again 
foretold,  a  "  multitude  of  nations." 

There  are  other  and  more  minute  incidents  left  upon 
record,  all  tending  to  establish  the  same  fact.  For  I 
observe,  that  amongst  the  Judges,  many,  whether  them- 
selves of  Ephraim  or  not,  do  appear  to  have  repaired 
thither  as  to  the  proper  seat  of  government.  I  find  that 
Deborah  "  dwelt  under  the  palm  tree,  between  Ramah 
and  Bethel,  in  Mount  Ephraim"  and  that  there  the 
children  of  Israel  went  up  to  her  for  judgment.1  I  find 
that  Gideon,  who  was  of  Ophrah  in  Manasseh,  where  he 
appears  in  general  to  have  lived,  and  where  he  was  at  last 
buried,  had,  nevertheless,  a  family  at  Shechem,  it  being 
incidentally  said,  that  the  mother  of  his  son  Abimelech 
resided  there,  and  that  there  Abimelech  himself  was  born  ;2 
a  trifle  in  itself,  yet  enough,  I  think,  to  suggest,  that  at 
Shechem  in  Ephraim,  Gideon  did  occasionally  dwell ;  the 
discharge  of  his  judicial  functions,  like  those  of  Pilate  at 
Jerusalem,  probably  constraining  him  to  a  residence  which 
he  might  not  otherwise  have  chosen.  I  find  this  same 
Shechem  the  head-quarters  of  this  same  Abimelech,  and 
the  support  of  his  cause  when  he  usurped  the  government 
of  Israel.3  And  I  subsequently  find  Tola,  though  a  man 
of  Issachar,  dwelling  in  Shamir,  in  Mount  Ephraim, 
(Shechem  having  been  recently  laid  waste,)  and  judging 
Israel  twenty  and  three  years.4 

Nor  is  this  all.  The  comparative  importance  of  Eph- 
raim amongst  the  tribes  during  the  time  of  the  Judges,  is 

>  Judges,  iv.  5.       *  lb.  viii.  27—32;  ix.  1.      3  ib.  ix.  22.      *  lb.  x   1 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  175 

further  detected  in  the  tone  of  authority,  not  to  say  me- 
nace, which  it  occasionally  assumes  towards  its  weaker 
brethren.  Gideon  leads  several  of  the  tribes  against  the 
Midianites,  but  Ephrairn  had  not  been  consulted.  "  Why 
hast  thou  served  us  thus,"  is  the  angry  remonstrance  of  the 
Ephraimites,  "  that  thou  calledst  us  not  when  thou  wentest 
to  fight  with  the  Midianites  ?  And  they  did  chide  with 
him  harshly."1  Gideon  stoops  before  the  storm;  he  dis- 
putes not  the  vast  superiority  of  Ephrairn,  his  gleaning 
being  more  than  another's  grapes.  Jephthah,  in  later  times, 
ventures  upon  a  similar  invasion  of  the  children  of  Am- 
nion, and  discomfits  them  with  great  slaughter,  but  he, 
too,  without  Ephraim's  help  or  cognizance :  again  the 
pride  of  this  powerful  tribe  is  wounded,  and  "  they  gather 
themselves  together,  and  go  northward,  and  say  unto 
Jephthah,  Wherefore  passedest  thou  over  to  fight  against 
the  children  of  Amnion,  and  didst  not  call  us  to  go  with 
thee  ?  we  will  burn  thine  house  upon  thee  with  fire."2 — 
All  this,  the  unreasonable  conduct  of  a  party  conscious  that 
it  has  the  law  of  the  strongest  on  its  side,  and,  by  virtue 
of  that  law  claiming  to  itself  the  office  of  dictator  amongst 
the  neighboring  tribes.  Well  then  might  David  express 
himself  with  regard  to  the  support  he  expected  from  this 
tribe,  in  terms  of  more  than  common  emphasis,  when  at 
last  seated  on  the  throne,  his  title  acknowledged  through- 
out Israel,  he  reviews  the  resources  of  his  consolidated 
empire,  and  exclaims,  "  Ephrairn  is  the  strength  of  my 
headP3  Accordingly,  all  the  ten  tribes  are  sometimes  ex- 
pressed under  the  comprehensive  name  of  Ephrairn4 — and 
the  gate  of  Jerusalem  which  looked  towards  Israel  appears 
to  have  been  called,  emphatically,  the  gate  of  Ephrairn5 — 

1  Judges  viii.  1.  2  lb.  xii.  1.  3  Ps.  Ix.  7. 

«  2  Chron.  ixv.  6  and  7.  5  2  Kings  nv.  13. 


176  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    II. 

and  Ephraim  and  Judah  together  represent  the  whole  of 
the  people  of  Israel,  from  Dan  to  Beer-sheba.1 

In  tracing  the  seeds  of  the  future  dissolution  of  the  ten 
from  the  two  tribes,  I  further  remark,  that  whilst  Samuel 
himself  remains  at  Ramah,  a  border  town  of  Benjamin  and 
Ephraim,  (for  Shiloh  and  Shechem  were  probably  now  in 
possession  of  the  Philistines,)  there  to  sit  in  judgment  on 
such  causes  as  Ephraim  and  the  northern  states  should 
bring  before  him,  he  sends  his  sons  to  be  judges  in  Beer- 
sheba,2  a  southern  town  belonging  to  Judah,3  as  though 
there  was  already  some  reluctance  between  these  rival 
tribes  to  resort  to  the  same  tribunal :  and  the  fierce  words 
lhat  passed  between  the  men  of  Israel  and  the  men  of  Ju- 
dah, on  the  subject  of  the  restoration  of  David  to  the  throne, 
the  former  claiming  ten  parts  in  him,  the  latter  nearness  of 
kin,4  still  indicate  that  the  breach  was  gradually  widening, 
and  that  however  sudden  was  the  final  disruption  of  the 
bond  of  union,  events  had  weakened  it  long  before.  Indeed, 
humanly  speaking,  nothing  could  in  all  probability  have 
preserved  it,  but  a  continuance  of  the  government  of  judges, 
under  God  ;  who,  taken  from  various  tribes,  and  according 
to  no  established  order,  might  have  secured  the  common- 
wealth from  that  jealousy  which  an  hereditary  possession 
of  power  by  any  one  tribe  was  sure  to  create,  and  did  cre- 
ate ;  and  which  burst  out  in  that  bitter  cry  of  Israel,  at  the 
critical  moment  of  the  separation,  "  What  j)or lion  have  we 
in  David  ?  neither  have  we  inheritance  in  the  son  of  Jesse 
— to  your  tents,  O  Israel :  now  see  to  thine  own  house,  Da- 
vid."'6 And  so,  by  the  natural  motions  of  the  human  heart, 
did  God  take  vengeance  of  the  people  whom  he  had  chosen, 

1  Isai.  vii.  9 — 17,  ct  alibi ;  Ezck.  xxxvii.  19.  2  1  Sam.  viiL  2. 

8  Josh.  xv.  28.  «  2  Sam.  xix.  43.  «  1  Kings  xii.  16. 


PART    H.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  177 

• 

for  rejecting  him  for  their  sovereign,  and  a  king,  indeed,  he 
gave  them,  as  they  desired,  but  he  gave  him  in  his  wrath. 

Thus  have  we  detected,  by  the  apposition  of  many  dis- 
tinct particulars,  a  gradual  tendency  of  the  Ten  Tribes 
to  become  confederate  under  Ephraim  ;  an  event,  to  which 
the  local  position,  numerical  superiority,  and  the  seat  of 
national  worship,  long  fixed  within  the  borders  of  Ephraim, 
together  conspired. 

But  meanwhile,  it  maybe  discovered  in  like  manner,  that 
Judah  and  Benjamin  were  also,  on  their  part,  knitting 
themselves  in  close  alliance ;  a  union  promoted  by  conti- 
guity ;  by  the  sympathy  of  being  the  only  two  royal  tribes ; 
by  the  connection  of  the  house  of  David  with  the  house  of 
Saul,  (the  political  importance  of  which  David  appears  to 
have  considered,  When  he  made  it  a  preliminary  of  his 
league  with  Abner,  that  Michal  should  be  restored,  whose 
heart  he  had  nevertheless  lost  j1)  and  finally,  and  perhaps 
above  all.  by  the  peculiar  position  selected  by  the  Almighty,2 
for  the  great  national  temple  which  was  soon  to  rob  Eph- 
raim of  his  ancient  honors  ;3  for  it  wras  not  to  be  planted  in 
Judah  only,  or  in  Benjamin  only,  but  on  the  confines  of 
both  ;  so  that  whilst  the  altars,  and  the  holy  place,  were  to 
stand  within  the  borders  of  the  one  tribe,  the  courts  of  the 
temple  were  to  extend  into  the  borders  of  the  other  tribe,4 
and  thus,  ihe  two  were  to  be  riveted  together,  as  it  were, 
by  a  cramp,  bound  by  a  sacred'  and  everlasting  bond,  being 
in  a  condition  to  exclaim,  in  a  sense  peculiarly  their  own, 
"  The  Temple  of  the  Lord,  the  Temple  of  the  Lord  are 
we." 

We  have  thus  traced,  by  means  of  the  hints  with  which 
Scripture  supplies  us,  (for  little  more  than  hints  have  we 

i  2  Sam.  iii.  13.  2  l  Chron.  xviii.  11.  3Ps,  Ixxviii.  67. 

*  Comp.  Josh.  xv.  63,  and  xviii.  28 ;  and  see  Lightfoot,  Vol.  i.  p.  1050  foL 


178  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    IK 

had,)  the  two  great  confederacies  into  which  the  tribes 
were  gradually,  perhaps  HDwittingly,  subsiding;  as  well  as 
some  of  the  circumstances  by  which  either  confederacy  was 
cemented.  Let  us  pursue  the  subject,  but  still  by  means 
of  the  under-current  of  the  history  only,  towards  the  schism. 
And  now  Ephraim  was  called  upon  to  witness  prepara- 
tions for  the  transfer  of  the  seat  of  national  worship  from 
himself  to  his  great  rival,  with  something,  we  may  believe, 
of  the  anguish  of  Phinehas'  wife,  when  she  heard  that  the 
Ark  of  God  was  taken,  and  Shiloh  to  be  no  longer  its 
resting-place ;  and  I-chabod  might  be  the  name  for  the 
mothers  of  Ephraim  at  that  hour  to  give  to  their  offspring, 
seeing  that  the  glory  was  departing  from  among  them.1 
For  what  desolation  and  disgrace  were  felt  to  accompany 
this  loss,  may  be  gathered  from  more  passages  than  one  in 
Jeremiah,  where  he  threatens  Jerusalem  with  a  like  visita- 
tion. "  I  will  do  unto  this  house,"  (saith  the  Lord,  by  the 
mouth  of  the  prophet,)  "  which  is  called  by  my  name, 
wherein  ye  trust,  and  unto  the  place  which  I  gave  to  you, 
and  to  your  fathers,  as  I  have  done  to  Shiloh.  And  I  will 
cast  you  ought  of  my  sight,  as  I  have  cast  out  all  your 
brethren,  even  the  whole  seed  of  Ephraim.'1'1  And  again 
— "  I  will  make  this  house  like  Shiloh,  and  will  make  this 
city  a  curse  to  all  the  nations  of  the  earth."2  With  a 
heavy  heart,  then,  must  this  high-spirited  and  ambitious 
tribe  have  found  that  "  the  place  which  God  had  chosen 
to  set  his  name  there,"  (so  often  spoken  of  by  Moses,  and 
the  choice  suspended  so  long,)  was  at  length  determined, 
ami  determined  against  him  ;  that  his  expectation  (for  such 
would  probably  be  indulged)  that  God  would  finally  fix  his 
seat  where  he  had  so  long  fixed  his  Tabernacle,  was  over- 
thrown;   that  the  Messiah,  whom  some  sanguine  inter- 

i  1  Sam.  iv.  21.  9  Jer.  vii.  14.  15;  xxvi.  6 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  179 

pr6ters  of  the  prophets  amongst  his  sons  had  declared 
should  come  from  between  his  feet,  was  not  to  be  of  him;1 
but  that  "  refusing  the  tabernacle  of  Joseph,  and  not 
choosing  any  longer  the  tribe  of  Ephraim,  (mark  the  pa- 
triotic exultation  with  which  the  Psalmist  proclaims  this,) 
God  chose  the  Tribe  of  Judah  and  Mount  Zion,  which  he 
loved."2 

Such  was  the  posture  of  the  nation  of  Israel,  such  the 
temper  of  the  times,  "  a  branch,"  as  it  were,  "  ready  to  fall, 
swelling  out  in  a  high  wall,  whose  breaking  cotneth  sud- 
denly at  an  instant,"  when  Solomon  began  to  collect  work- 
men, and  to  levy  taxes  throughout  all  Israel,  for  those  vast 
and  costly  structures  which  he  reared,  even  "  the  house  of 
the  Lord  and  his  own  house,  and  Millo,  and  the  wall  of 
Jerusalem,"3  besides  many  more  ;  in  some  of  them,  indeed, 
showing  himself  the  pious  founder,  or  the  patriot  prince; 
but  in  some,  the  luxurious  sensualist ;  and  in  some,  again, 
the  dissolute  patron  of  idolatry.4  On,  however,  he  went; 
and  as  if  in  small  things  as  well  as  great,  this  growing 
division  amongst  the  tribes  (fatal  as  it  was  in  many  re- 
spects to  prove)  was  ever  to  be  fostered  ;  as  if  the  coming 
event  was  on  every  occasion  to  be  casting  its  shadow  be- 
fore, a  separate  ruler,  we  read,  "  was  placed  over  all  the 
cbarge  of  the  house  of  Joseph  #"5  that  is,  one  individual 
was  made  overseer  over  the  work,  or  the  tribute,  or  both, 
of  the  ten  tribes  ;  for  so  I  understand  the  phrase,  agree- 
ably to  its  meaning  in  other  passages  of  Scripture.6     And 

1  See  on  this  subject,  Allix,  Reflections  upon  the  Four  last  Books  of  Mo- 
ses, p.  180. 

2  Ps.  lxxviii.  G7.     3  i  Kings  ix.  15.     *  lb.  xi.  7.     «  rb.  xi.  28. 

6  See  2  Sam.  xix.  20,  and  Polo  in  he.  -n'>rco^  Tiri;  'lapabX  <?<ii   ottow 

I         .  Sept.     The  rights  of  primogeniture,  which  Reuben  had  forfeited, 

appear  to  have  been  divided  between  Judah  and  Joseph:  to  Judah,  the 

headship ;  to  Joseph,  the  double  portion  of  the  eldest  son,  and  whatever  else 

belonged  to  the  "  birthright."     See  1   Chron.  v.  2.     Thus,  the  people  of 


180  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    II. 

who  was  he  ? — a  young  man,  an  industrious  man,  a  mighty 
man  of  valor,  (for  these  qualities  Solomon  made  choice  of 
him,)  and  above  all,  a  man  of  Ephraim  ;l  Jeroboam  it 
was. 

It  is  impossible  to  imagine  events  working  more  steadily 
towards  a  given  point,  than  here.  The  knot  had  already 
shown  itself  far  from  indissoluble,  and  now,  time,  oppor- 
tunity, and  a  skilful  hand,  combine  to  loose  it.  Here  we 
have  a  great  body  of  artificers,  almost  an  army  of  them- 
selves, kept  together  some  twenty  years — Ephraimites  and 
their  colleagues  engaged  in  works  consecrated  to  the  glory 
and  aggrandizement  of  Judah  and  Benjamin,  rather  than 
to  their  own — Ephraimites  contributing  to  the  removal  of 
the  seat  of  government  from  Ephraim  to  Judah — Eph- 
raimites paying  taxes  great  and  grievous,  not  merely  to  the 
erection  of  a  national  place  of  worship,  (for  to  this  they 
might  have  given  consent,  the  command  being  of  God,) 
but  to  the  construction  of  palaces  for  princes,  never  again 
to  be  of  their  own  line ;  and  temples  for  the  idols  of  those 
princes,  living  and  dead,  which  were  expressly  contrary  to 
the  command  of  God — -And  lastly,  we  have  an  Ephraira- 
ite,  even  Jeroboam,  with  every  talent  for  mischief,  endowed 
with  every  opportunity  for  exercising  it ;  put  into  an  office 
which  at  once  invested  him  with  authority,  and  secured 
him  from  suspicion,  so  that  his  future  crown  was  but  the 

Israel  became  biceps,  and  were  comprised  under  the  names  of  the  two  heads. 
See  Judges'  x.  9,  where  the  house  of  Ephraim  is  synonymous  with  the  house 
of  Joseph. 

Lightfoot  considers  Joseph  to  have  been  the  principal  family  while  the 
Ark  was  at  Shiloh,  and  all  Israel  to  have  been  named  after  it,  as  in  Ps. 
Ixxx.  1,  but  that  when  God  refused  Joseph,  and  chose  Judah  for  the  chief, 
Ps.  lxxviii.  08,  09,  then  there  began,  and  continued,  a  difference  and  dis- 
tinction betwixt  Israel  and  Judah,  Joseph  and  Judah,  Ephraim  and  Judah, 
the  rest  of  the  tribes  being  called  by  all  these  names,  in  opposition  to  Judah. 
—Lightfoot,  i.  06,  fol.  '  1  Kings  xi.  26. 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  181 

consummation  of  his  present  intrigues ;  the  issue  of  his 
own  subtilty,  and  the  people's  discontent.  Nor  is  this 
matter  of  conjecture.  Is  it  not  written  in  the  Book  of 
Kings,  (most  casually,  however,)  that  the  people  of  Israel 
— 1  speak  of  Israel  as  distinguished  from  Judah  and  Ben- 
jamin— in  the  first  moment  of  madness,  on  the  accession 
of  Rehoboam,  wreaked  their  vengeance — upon  whom,  of 
all  men  ? — upon  Adoniram,  the  very  man  whom  Solomon 
his  father  had  appointed  to  levy  men  and  means  through- 
out Israel,  the  tax-gatherer  for  the  erection  of  these  stupen- 
dous works  !  and  him,  the  victim  of  popular  indignation, 
did  all  Israel  stone  with  stones  till  he  died.'  The  wisdom 
and  policy  of  Solomon,  indeed,  in  spite  of  his  faults  and 
follies,  upheld  his  empire  till  the  last,  and  saved  it  from 
falling  in  pieces  before  the  time ;  but  how  completely  the 
fulness  of  that  time  Avas  come,  is  clear,  when  no  sooner 
was  he  dead,  than  his  son,  and  rightful  successor,  found  it 
expedient  to  hasten  to  Shechem,  there  to  meet  all  Israel, 
conscious  as  he  was,  that  however  his  title  was  admitted 
by  Judah,  it  was  quite  another  thing  whether  Ephraim 
would  give  in  his  allegiance  too  ;  and,  as  the  event  proved, 
his  apprehensions  were  not  without  a  cause.2 

And  now  Jeroboam,  a  man  to  seize  upon  any  seeming 
advantages  which  his  situation  afforded  him,  at  once  en- 
listed the  ancient  sympathies  of  the  people,  by  forthwith 
rebuilding  Shechem,  which  had  been  burned  by  Abim- 
elech,3  and  making  it  his  residence,  though  he  had  all  the 
northern  tribes  among  whom  to  choose  ;  and  with  similar 
policy,  he  proceeded  to  provide  for  them  a  worship  of  their 
own,  nor  would  allow  that  "  in  Jerusalem  alone  was  the 
place  where  men  ought  to  worship" — a  worship,  rather,  I 
think,  a  gross  corruption,  than  an  utter  abandonment  of 

i  1  Kings  v.  14;  xii.  18.  »  lb.  xii.  1.  3  ib.  xii.  25. 

16 


182  THE    VERACITY   OF    THE  PART    II. 

the  true,  the  idolatry  of  the  second,  more  than  of  the  first 
commandment,  though  the  two  offences  are  very  closely 
connected,  and  almost  of  necessity  run  into  one  another. 
For  I  observe,  throughout  the  whole  history  of  the  kings 
of  Israel,  a  distinction  made  between  the  sin  of  Jeroboam 
and  the  worship  of  Baal,  somewhat  in  favor  of  the  former ; 
and  that,  offensive  as  they  both  were  to  the  one  Eternal 
and  Invisible  God,  Baal-worship  was  the  greater  abomina- 
tion. Perhaps,  too,  it  may  be  added,  that  this  distinction 
is  recognized  by  the  apostle,  whose  words  are,  that  "  the 
glory  of  the  incorruptible  God  was," — not  altogether  ab- 
jured— but  "changed  into  an  image  made  like  four-footed 
beasts."1  But,  however  this  may  be,  a  worship  of  their 
own,  independent  of  the  temple,  and  of  the  regular  priest- 
hood, Jeroboam  established,  still  building  upon  the  rites  of 
old  time,  and  accommodating  the  calendar  of  feasts  in  some 
measure  to  that  which  had  existed  before  ;2  and  whatever 
might  be  his  reason  for  selecting  Bethel  for  one  of  his 
calves,  whether  the  holy  character  of  the  place  itself,  or 
its  vicinity  to  the  still  holier  Shiloh,3  whither  the  people  had 
habitally  resorted,  I  discover  a  very  sufficient  reason  for 
his  choice  of  Dan  for  the  other,  exclusive  of  all  considera- 
tion of  local  convenience,  the  curious  circumstance,  that  in 
this  town  there  had  already  prevailed  for  ages  a  form  of 
worship,  or  of  idolatry  (I  should  rather  say),  very  closely 
resembling  that  which  he  now  proposed  to  set  up  through- 
out Israel,  and  furnishing  him,  if  not  with  a  strict  pre- 
cedent, at  least  with  a  most  suitable  foundation  on  which 
to  work.  For  in  this  town  stood  the  teraphim,  or  images 
of  Micah,  whatever  might  be  their  shape,  which  the 
original  founders  of  Dan  had  taken  with  them,  and  planted 
there  ;  and  a  priesthood  there  was  to  minister  to  these 

1  Rom.  i.  23.  2  1  Kings  xii.  32;  Hosea  ii.  11 ;  ix.  5. 

3  Judges  xxi.  19. 


PRAT    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  183 

images,  precisely  like  that  of  Jeroboam,  not  of  the  sacer- 
dotal order,  for  they  were  sons  of  Manassah  ;  and  thus 
was  there  an  organized  system  of  dissent  from  the  national 
church,  existing  in  the  town  of  Dan,  "  all  the  time  that 
the  House  of  God  was  in  Shiloh  ;"1  and  thus  was  accom- 
plished, I  suspect,  that  mysterious  prediction  of  Jacob, 
"  Dan  shall  be  a  serpent  by  the  way,  an  adder  in  the  path, 
that  biteth  the  horse-heels,  so  that  his  rider  shall  fall  back- 
ward."2 

On  the  present  occasion,  those  undesigned  coincidences, 
which  are  the  staple  of  my  argument,  have  not  been  pre- 
sented in  so  perspicuous  a  manner  as  they  might  have 
been  sometimes  ;  for  the  attention  has,  in  this  instance, 
been  directed  not  to  one  point,  singled  out  of  several,  but  to 
the  details  of  a  continuous  history.  This  I  could  not  avoid. 
At  the  same  time,  these  details,  on  a  review  of  them,  will 
be  found  to  involve  many  minute  coincidences,  and  those 
just  such  as  constitute  the  difference  between  the  best-im- 
agined story  in  the  world  and  a  narrative  of  actual  facts. 
For  let  this  be  borne  in  mind,  that  the  sketch  which  I  have 
offered  of  the  gradual  development  of  the  schism  between 
Israel  and  Judah,  is  by  no  means  an  abridgment  of  the  ob- 
vious Scripture  account  of  it — very  far  from  it. — Looking  to 
that  part  of  Scripture  which  directly  relates  to  this  schism, 
and  confining  ourselves  to  that,  we  might  be  led  to  think 
the  rent  of  the  kingdom  as  sudden  and  unshaped  an  event, 
as  the  rending  of  the  prophet's  mantle,  which  was  its  type : 
for  here,  as  elsewhere,  the  history  is  rapid  and  abrupt. 
What  I  have  offered  is,  strictly  speaking,  a  theory  ;  a  the- 
ory by  which  a  great  many  loose  and  scattered  data,  such 
as  Scripture  affords  to  a  diligent  inquirer,  and  to  no  other, 
are,   with   much  seeming   consistency,   combined   into  a 

1  Judges  xviii.  31.  s  Gen.  xlix.  17. 


184  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART  II. 

whole ;  it  is  the  pattern  which  gradually  comes  out,  when 
the  many-colored  threads,  gleaned  up  as  we  have  gone 
along,  are  worked  into  a  web. 

1.  For  instance — lean  conceive  it  very  possible,  without 
claiming  to  myself  any  peculiar  sagacity,  for  a  man  to  read, 
and  not  inattentively  either,  the  sacred  books  from  Joshua 
to  Chronicles,  and  yet  never  happen  to  be  struck  with  the 
fact  that  Ephraim  was  a  leading  tribe  ;  that  it  was  the 
head,  allowed  or  understood,  of  an  easy  confederacy ;  the 
thing  is  scarcely  to  be  discovered  but  by  the  apposition  of 
many  passages,  dispersed  through  these  books,  bearing, 
perhaps,  little  or  no  relation  to  one  another,  except  that  of 
having  a  common  bias  towards  this  one  point.  The  same 
may  be  said  of  the  main  cause  of  this  comparative  superi- 
ority of  Ephraim,  the  accidental,  as  some  would  call  it, — 
as  we  will  call  it,  the  providential,  establishment  of  the 
Tabernacle  within  its  borders.  The  circumstance  of  Shiloh 
being  the  place  whither  all  Israel  went  up  to  worship  for 
three  centuries  or  more,  all  important  as  it  was  to  the  tribe 
whom  it  concerned,  is  not  put  forward  either  as  account- 
ing for  the  prosperity  of  Ephraim  above  its  fellows,  whilst 
in  Ephraim  the  Ark  stood  ;  or  for  the  jealousy  which  it 
discovered  towards  Judah,  when  to  Judah  the  Ark  had 
been  transferred ;  nor  yet  as  being  the  natural  means  by 
which  the  remarkable  words  of  Jacob  were  brought  to  pass, 
touching  the  future  pre-eminence  of  Ephraim  and  Judah, 
howbeit,  as  tribes,  they  were  then  but  in  the  loins  of  their 
fathers.  So  far  from  this,  when  in  the  Book  of  Joshua  we 
are  told  that  the  Tabernacle  was  set  up  in  Shiloh,  not  a 
syllable  is  added  by  which  we  can  guess  where  Shiloh 
was,  whether  in  Ephraim  or  elsewhere;1  and  it  is  only  af- 
ter some  investigation,  and  by  inference  at  last,  that  in 
Ephraim  we  can  fix  it. 

1  Josh,  xviii.  1. 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  185 

2.  The  same  is  true  of  the  league  between  Benjamin 
and  Judah.  What  were  the  sympathies  beyond  mere 
proximity,  which  cemented  them  so  firmly,  is  altogether  a 
matter  for  ourselves  to  unravel,  if  unravel  it  we  can.  We 
see  them,  indeed,  acting  in  concert,  as  we  see  also  the  other 
tribes  acting,  but  the  books  of  Scripture  enter  into  no  ex- 
planations in  either  case.  Nevertheless,  I  find  in  one 
place,  that  Saul,  the  first  king,  was  of  Benjamin,  and  in 
another,  that  David,  the  second  king,  was  of  Judah,  with 
a  prospect  of  a  continuance  of  the  succession  in  that  line  ; 
and  here  I  perceive  a  mutual  sympathy  likely  to  spring 
out  of  the  exclusive  honors  of  the  two  royal  tribes.  Else- 
where, I  find  that  the  two  royal  houses  of  Saul  and  David 
were  united  by  marriage,  and  here  I  detect  a  further  ap- 
proximation. I  look  again,  and  learn  that  a  temple  was 
built  for  national  worship  in  a  city,  which  one  text  places 
in  Judah,  and  a  parallel  text  in  Benjamin,  leaving  me  to 
infer  (as  was  the  fact)  that  the  city  was  on  the  confines 
of  both,  and  that  upon  the  confines  of  both  (as  was  also 
the  fact)  the  foundations  of  the  temple  were  laid.  In 
these,  and  perhaps  in  other  similar  matters,  which  might 
be  enumerated,  I  certainly  do  discover  elements  of  union, 
however  the  writers,  who  record  them,  may  never  speak 
of  them  as  such. 

3.  Again  ;  the  motives  which  operated  with  Jeroboam 
in  the  selection  of  Shechem  for  his  residence,  or  of  Dan 
for  his  idolatry,  are  not  even  glanced  at,  though,  in  either 
instance,  reasons  there  were,  we  have  seen,  to  make  the 
choice  judicious.  And  whilst  we  are  told  that  he  fled  from 
Solomon,  when  the  conspirator  was  detected  in  him,  or 
when  Ahijah's  prophecy  awakened  the  monarch's  fears, 
and  went  into  Egypt,  and  that  from  Egypt,  at  the  death 
of  Solomon,  he  hasted  back  to  take  his  part  in  those  stir- 
ring times,  no  hint,  the  most  remote,  is  thrown  out,  that 

16* 


186  THE    VERACITY   OF    THE  PART    II. 

his  sojourn  in  that  idolatrous  land,  and  the  peculiar  nature 
of  its  idolatry,  influenced  him  in  the  choice  of  a  calf  for 
the  representation  of  his  own  God,  though  the  one  fact 
does  very  curiously  corroborate  the  other,  and  still  adds 
credibility  to  the  whole  history. 

In  all  this  I  discover  much  of  coincidence,  nothing  of  de- 
sign. I  see  an  extraordinary  revolution  asserted,  and  then 
my  eyes  being  opened,  I  perceive  that  the  seeds  of  it,  not 
however  described  as  such,  and  often  so  small  as  to  be 
easily  overlooked,  had  been  cast  upon  the  waters  genera- 
tions before.  I  see  coalitions  and  convulsions  in  the  body 
politic  of  Israel,  and  I  find,  not  without  some  pains-taking, 
and  after  all  but  in  part,  attractive  or  repulsive  principles 
at  work  in  that  body,  which,  without  being  named  as 
causes,  do  account  for  such  effects.  I  see  both  in  persons 
and  places,  so  soon  as  I  become  intimately  acquainted  with 
their  several  bearings,  something  appropriate  to  the  events 
with  which  they  are  connected,  though  I  see  nothing  of 
the  kind  at  first,  because  no  such  propriety  appears  upon 
the  surface.  These  I  hold  to  be  the  characters  of  truth, 
and  the  history  upon  which  they  are  stamped  I  ac- 
cordingly receive,  nothing  doubting — meanwhile,  not  fail- 
ing to  remark,  and  to  admire,  the  silent  transition  of  events 
into  those  very  channels  which  Jacob  in  spirit  had  de- 
clared ages  before  ;  and  to  acknowledge,  without  attempt- 
ing fully  to  understand,  the  mysterious  workings  of  that 
Controlling  Power,  which  can  make  men  its  instruments 
without  making  them  its  tools ;  at  once  compelling  them 
to  do  His  will,  and  permitting  them  to  do  their  own : 
proving  himself  faithful,  and  leaving  them  free. 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  187 


XVI. 

The  next  coincidences  I  have  to  offer  will  turn  on  the 
condition  of  the  two  kingdoms  of  Israel  and  Judah,  whether 
political  or  religious,  as  it  was  affected  by  their  separation ; 
and  will  supply  evidence  to  the  truth  of  the  history. 

"And  Baasha,  King  of  Israel,"  we  read,  "went  up 
against  Judah,  and  built  Ramah,  that  he  might  not  suffer 
any  to  go  out  or  come  in  to  Asa  King  of  Judah.1 

Ramah  seems  to  have  been  a  border  town,  between  the 
kingdoms  of  Israel  and  Judah,  and  to  have  stood  in  such 
a  position  as  to  be  the  key  to  either.  The  King  of  Israel, 
however,  was  the  party  anxious  to  fortify  it,  not  the  King 
of  Judah  ;  indeed,  the  latter,  as  we  learn  from  the  Chron- 
icles,2 did  his  best  to  frustrate  the  efforts  of  Baasha,  and 
succeeded,  apparently  not  desirous  of  having  Ramah  con- 
verted into  a  place  of  strength,  though  it  should  be  in  his 
own  keeping  ;  for  Asa  having  contrived  to  draw  Baasha 
away  from  this  work,  does  not  seize  upon  it  and  complete 
it  for  himself,  but  contents  himself  with  carrying  off  the 
stones  and  the  timber,  and  using  them  elsewhere.  It  is 
evident,  therefore,  that  it  was  an  object  with  the  kings  of 
Israel,  that  this  strong  frontier-post  should  be  established, 
—with  the  kings  of  Judah,  that  it  should  be  removed. 
Now  this  is  singular,  when  we  remember,  that  after  the 
schism  the  numerical  strength  lay  vastly  on  the  side  of 
Israel,  one  hundred  and  eighty  thousand  men  being  all 
that  Judah  could  then  count  in  his  ranks,3  whereas  eight 
hundred  thousand  were  actually  produced  a  few  years 
afterwards  by  Jeroboam,  and  even  then  he  was  not  what 
lie  had  been.4     It  was  to  be  expected,  therefore,  that  the 

1  1  Kings,  xv.  17.  2  2  Chron.  xvi.  6. 

3  1  Kings  xii.  21.  4  2  Chron.  xiii.  3. 


188  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    II. 

fear  of  invasion  would  have  been  upon  Judah  alone,  the 
weaker  state,  and  that,  accordingly,  Judah  would  have 
gladly  taken,  and  kept  possession  of  a  fortress  which  was 
the  bridle  of  the  kingdom  on  that  side,  and  have  made  it 
strong  for  himself.  Yet,  as  we  have  seen,  the  fact  was 
quite  the  other  way.  How  is  this  to  be  explained  ?  By  a 
single  circumstance,  which  accounts  for  a  great  deal  be- 
sides this  ;  though  the  explanation  presents  itself  in  the 
most  incidental  manner  imaginable,  and  without  the 
smallest  reference  to  the  particular  case  of  Ramah. 

In  the  twelfth  chapter  of  the  first  Book  of  Kings,  I  read 
.(v.  20),  that  ';  Jeroboam  said  in  his  heart,  Now  shall  the 
kingdom  return  to  the  house  of  David,  if  this  people  go  up 
to  sacrifice  in  the  house  of  the  Lord  at  Jerusalem  ;"  and 
that  accordingly  he  set  up  a  worship  of  his  own  in  Bethel 
and  Dan. 

In  the  eleventh  chapter  of  the  second  Book  of  Chron- 
icles, I  read  (v.  14)  that  "  he  cast  oil  the  Levites'7  (as  in- 
deed it  was  most  natural  that  he  should)  "  from  executing 
the  priest's  office,"  and  ordained  him  priests  after  his  own 
pleasure.  I  read  further,  that  in  consequence  of  this  sub- 
version of  the  Church  of  God,  "  the  priests  and  the  Levites" 
that  were  in  all  Israel  resorted  unto  Judah  out  of  all  their 
coasts  ;"  nor  they  only,  the  ministers  of  God,  who  might 
well  migrate,  but  that  "  after  them  out  of  all  the  tribes  of 
Israel,  such  as  set  their  hearts  to  seek  the  Lord  God  of 
their  fathers ;  so  they  strengthened"  (it  is  added)  "  the 
kingdom  of  Judah,  and  made  Rehoboam,  the  son  of  Solo- 
mon strong,"  (v.  1G,  17.)  The  son  of  Nebat  was  a  great 
politician  in  his  own  way,  but  he  had  yet  to  learn,  that  by 
righteousness  is  a  nation  really  exalted,  and  that  its  right- 
eous citizens  are  those  by  whom  the  throne  is  in  truth  up- 
held. These  he  was  condemned  to  lose  ;  these  he  and  his 
ungodly  successors  were  to  see  gradually  waste  away 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  189 

before  their  eyes ;  depart  from  a  kingdom  founded  in  in- 
iquity ;  and  transfer  their  allegiance  to  another  and  a 
better  soil.  Hence  the  natural  solicitude  of  Israel  to  put 
a  stop  to  the  alarming  drainage  of  all  that  was  virtuous 
out  of  their  borders,  and  the  clumsy  contrivance  of  a  forti- 
fication at  Ramah  for  the  purpose ;  as  though  a  spirit  of 
uncompromising  devotion  to  God,  happily  the  most  uncon- 
querable of  things,  was  to  be  coerced  by  a  barrier  of  bricks. 
Hence,  too,  the  no  less  natural  solicitude  of  Judah  to  re- 
move this  fortification,  Judah  being  desirous  that  no  ob- 
stacle, however  small,  should  be  opposed  to  the  influx  of 
those  virtuous  Israelites,  who  would  be  the  strength  of  any 
nation  wherein  they  settled.  Here  I  find  a  coincidence  of 
the  most  satisfactory  kind,  between  the  building  of  Ramah 
by  Israel,  the^over throw  of  it  by  Judah,  and  the  tide  of 
emigration  uhich  was  setting  in  from  Israel  towards 
Judah,  by  reason  of  Jeroboam's  idolatry.  Yet  the  relation 
of  these  events  to  one  another  is  not  expressed  in  the  his- 
tory, nor  are  the  events  named  under  the  same  head,  or  in 
the  same  chapter*. 


XVII. 

Nor  is  this  all.  '  Still  keeping  in  mind  this  single  con- 
sideration, that  the  more '  godly  of  the  people  of  the  ten 
tribes  were  disgusted  at  the  calves,  and  retired,  we  may  at 
once  account  fox  the  progressive  augmentation  of  the 
armies  of  Judah,  and  the  corresponding  decrease  of  the 
armies  of  Israel,  which  the  subsequent  history  of  the  two 
kingdoms  casually,  and  at  intervals  displays. 

Immediately  after  the  separation,  Rehoboam  assembled 
the  forces  of  his  two  tribes,  and  found  them,  as  I  have 
said,  one  hundred  and  eighty  thousand  men.     Some  eigh- 


190  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    II. 

teen  years  afterwards,  Ahijah,  his  son,  was  able  to  raise 
against  Jeroboam  (who  still,  however,  was  vastly  stronger) 
four  hundred  thousand.1  This  is  a  considerable  step. 
Some  six  or  seven  years  later,  Asa,  the  son  of  Ahijah,  is 
invaded  by  a  countless  host  of  Ethiopians.  On  this  occa- 
sion, notwithstanding  the  numbers  which  must  have  fallen 
already  in  the  battle  with  Jeroboam,  he  brings  into  the 
field  five  hundred  and  eighty  thousand  :  so  rapidly  were 
the  resources  of  Judah  on  the  advance.  About  two  and 
thirty  years  later  still,  the  army  of  Jehoshaphat,  the  son  of 
Asa,  consists  of  one  million  one  hundred  and  sixty  thou- 
sand men  ;2  a  prodigious  increase  in  the  population  of  the 
kingdom  of  Judah. 

On  the  other  hand,  we  may  trace  (the  act,  it  must  be 
observed,  is  altogether  our  own,  no  such  comparison  being 
instituted  in  the  history)  the  gradual  decay  and  depopula- 
tion of  the  kingdom  of  Israel.  Jeroboam  himself,  we  have 
found,  was  eight  hundred  thousand  strong.  The  contin- 
ual diminution  of  this  national  army,  we  cannot  in  the 
present  instance,  always  trace  from  actual  numbers,  as  we 
did  in  the  former  ;  but,  from  circumstances  which  transpire 
in  the  history,  we  can  trace  it  by  inference.  Thus,  Ahab, 
one  of  the  successors  of  Jeroboam,  and  contemporary  with 
Jehoshaphat,  whose  immense  armaments  we  have  seen,  is 
threatened  by  Benhadad  and  the  Syrians.  Benhadad 
will  send  men  to  take  out  of  his  house,  and  out  of  the 
houses  of  his  servants,  whatever  is  pleasant  in  their  eyes.3 
It  is  the  insolent  message  of  one  who  felt  Israel  to  be  weak, 
and  being  weak,  to  invite  aggression.  Favored  by  a  panic, 
Ahab  triumphs  for  the  once  ;  but  at  the  return  of  the 
year  Benhadad  returns.  Ahab  is  warned  of  this  long 
before.     "Go  strengthen  thyself,"  is  the  friendly  exhorta- 

l  2  Chron.  xiii.  3.  2  lb.  xvii.  14—18.  3  i  Kinsrs  xx.  G. 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  191 

tion  of  the  prophet  (v.  22.)— no  doubt  he  did  so,  to  the 
best  of  his  means,  but  after  all,  "  when  the  children  of 
Israel  were  numbered,  and  were  all  present,  and  went 
against  them,  the  children  of  Israel  pitched  before  the 
Syrians  like  two  little  flocks  of  kids,  but  the  Syrians  filled 
the  country"  (v.  27).  And  in  Joram's  days,  the  son  and 
successor  of  Ahab,  such  was  the  boldness  of  Syria,  and 
the  weakness  of  Israel,  that  the  former  was  constantly 
sending  marauding  parties,  "companies,"  as  they  are 
called,  or  "bands,"1  into  Israel's  quarters,  sometimes 
taking  the  inhabitants  captive,  and  sometimes  even  lay- 
ing siege  to  considerable  towns.2  And  in  the  reign  of 
Jehu,  the  next  king,  Syria,  with  Hazael  at  its  head,  crip- 
pled Israel  still  more  terribly,  actually  seizing  upon  all  the 
land  of  Jordan  eastward,  Gilead,  the  Gadites,  the  Reuben- 
ites,  and  the  Manassites,  from  Aroer  to  Bashan.3  And  to 
complete  the  picture,  the  whole  army  of  Jehoahaz,  the 
next  in  the  royal  succession  of  Israel,  consisted  of  fifty 
horsemen,  ten  chariots,  and  ten  thousand  foot,  Syria  hav- 
ing exterminated  the  rest  ;<  so  gradually  was  Israel  upon 
the  decline. 

Now  it  must  be  remembered,  in  order  that  the  force  of 
the  argument  may  be  felt,  that  no  parallel  of  the  kind  we 
have  been  drawing  is  found  in  the  history  itself;  no  invi- 
tation to  others  to  draw  one  :  the  materials  for  doing  so  it 
does  indeed  furnish,  dispersed,  however,  over  a  wide  field, 
and  less  definite  than  might  be  wished,  were  our  object  to 
ascertain  the  relative  strength  of  the  two  kingdoms  with 
exactness ;  that,  however,  it  is  not ;  and  the  very  circum- 
stance, that  the  gradual  growth  of  Judah,  and  declension 
of  Israel,  are  sometimes  to  be  gathered  from  other  facts 
than  positive  numerical  evidence,  is  enough  in  itself  to  show 

»  2  Kings  v.  2;  vi.  2,  3;  ami.  21.  «  lb.  vi  14  23 

»**.»  .Ib.xffi.7. 


192  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    II. 

that  the  historian  could  have  no  design  studiously  to  point 
out  the  coincidence  of  facts  with  his  casual  assertion,  that 
the  Levites  had  been  supplanted  by  the  priests  of  the  calves, 
and  that  multitudes  had  quitted  the  country  with  them,  in 
just  indignation. 


XVIII. 

There  is  still  another  coincidence  which  falls  under  the 
same  head. 

In  the  fifteenth  chapter  of  the  first  Book  of  Kings  (v.  28) 
I  read  that  "  Baasha  the  son  of  Ahijah,  of  the  house  of 
Issachar,  conspired  against  him  (i.  e.  Nadab  the  son  of  Je- 
roboam) at  Gibbet/to/t,  which  belonged  to  the^Pliilistines  ; 
for  Nadab  and  all  Israel  laid  siege  to  Gibbethon." 

It  appears  then  that  Gibbethon,  situated  in  the  tribe  of 
Dan,  had  by  some  means  or  other  fallen  into  the  hands  of 
the  Philistines,  and  that  the  forces  of  Israel  were  now  en- 
gaged in  recovering  possession  of  it.  It  may  seem  a  very 
hopeless  undertaking,  at  this  time  of  day,  to  ascertain  the 
circumstances  of  which  an  enemy  availed  himself,  in  order 
to  gain  possession  of  a  particular  town  in  Canaan,  near 
three  thousand  years  ago.  Yet,  perhaps,  the  investigation, 
distant  as  it  is,  is  not  desperate — for  in  the  twenty-first 
chapter  of  Joshua  (v.  23)  I  find  Gibbethon  and  her  suburbs 
mentioned  as  a  city  of  the  Levites.  Now  Jeroboam,  we 
have  heard,  drove  all  the  Levites  out  of  Israel;  what  then 
can  be  more  probable,  than  that  Gibbethon,  being  thus  sud- 
denly evacuated,  the  Philistines,  a  remnant  of  the  old  en- 
emy, still  lurking  in  the  country,  and  ever  ready  to  rush  in 
wherever  there  was  a  breach,  should  have  spied  an  oppor- 
tunity in  the  defenceless  state  of  Gibbethon,  and  claimed 


PART   II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  193 

it  as  their  own  71  It  is  indeed  far  from  improbable  that  this 
story  of  Gibbethon  is  that  of  many  other  Levitical  cities 
throughout  Israel ;  that  this  is  but  a  glimpse  of  much  sim- 
ilar confusion,  misery,  and  intestine  tumult,  by  which  that 
kingdom  was  now  convulsed ;  and  though  a  solitary  fact 
in  itself,  a  type  of  many  more  ; — and  thus,  in  another  way, 
did  the  profane  act  of  Jeroboam  operate  to  the  downfall  of 
his  kingdom,  and  fatally  eat  into  its  strength. 

Whether  I  am  right  in  this  conjecture,  it  is  impossible 
to  tell ;  the  case  does  not  admit  of  positive  decision  either 
way  ;  but,  certainly,  the  grounds  upon  which  it  rests  are, 
to  say  the  least,  very  suspicious  ;  and  if  they  are  sound,  as 
I  think  they  are,  I  cannot  imagine  a  point  of  harmony 
more  complete,  or  more  undesigned,  than  that  which  we 
have  found  between  these  half  dozen  words  touching  Gib- 
bethon, a  Levitical  city,  lapsing  into  the  hands  of  the  Phi- 
listines, and  the  expulsion  of  the  Levites  out  of  Israel  by 
the  sin  of  Jeroboam. 


XIX 

Nor  is  this  all.  There  is  another  and  a  still  more  val- 
uable coincidence  yet,  connected  with  this  part  of  my  sub- 

1  That  the  Philistines  were  thus  dispersed  over  the  land  may  be  gathered 
from  many  hints  in  Scripture ;  even  in  the  kingdom  of  Judah  they  were  to 
be  found,  much  more  in  Israel.  "  Some  of  the  Philistines  brought  Jehosha- 
phat  presents  and  tribute  silver."  2  Chron.  xvii.  11.  Probably  the  mis- 
creants mentioned  I  Kings  xv.  12,  whom  Asa  expelled,  and  those  mentioned 
xxii.  40.  whom  Jchoshaphat  Ills  son  drove  out,  and  those  again  mentioned 
2  Kings  xxiii.  7,  who  were  established  even  at  Jerusalem,  whom  Josiah  cast 
out,  were  all  of  this  nation.  And  there  still  were  Hittites  somewhere  at 
hand,  who  had  even  Icings  of  their  own,  1  Kings  x.  29;  2  Kings  vii.  6; 
and  we  read  of  a  land  of  the  Philistines,  where  the  Shunamitess  sojourned 
during  the  famine,  2  Kings  viii.  2— all  evident  tokens,  that  a  considerable 
body  of  the  primitive  inhabitants  of  Palestine  still  dwelt  in  it. 

17 


194  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    [I. 

ject ;  more  valuable,  because  involving  in  itself  a  greater 
number  of  particulars,  and,  therefore,  more  liable  to  a  flaw, 
if  the  combination  was  artificial.  When  Elijah  has  worked 
his  great  miracle  on  the  top  of  Carmel,  and  kindled  the 
sacrifice  by  fire  from  heaven,  he  has  to  fly  from  Jezebel  for 
his  life,  who  swears  that,  by  the  morrow,  she  will  deal  with 
him  as  lie  had  dealt  with  the  prophets  of  Baal  her  god.  and 
slay  him.1  Now  when  it  was  so  common  a  practice,  as  we 
have  seen,  for  the  godly  amongst  the  people  of  Israel  to 
betake  themselves  to  Judah  in  their  distress,  there  to  wor- 
ship the  God  of  their  Fathers  without  scandal  and  without 
persecution,  it  seems  obvious  that  this  was  the  place  for 
Elijah  to  repair  unto  ; — the  most  appropriate,  for  it  was  be- 
cause he  had  been  very  jealous  for  the  Lord  that  he  was 
banished — the  most  convenient,  for  no  other  was  so  near; 
he  had  but  to  cross  the  borders,  one  would  think,  and  he 
was  safe.  Yet  neither  on  this  occasion,  nor  yet  during  the 
three  preceding  years  of  drought,  when  Ahab  sought  to  lay 
hands  upon  him,  did  Elijah  seek  sanctuary  in  Judah. 
First  he  hides  himself  by  the  brook  Cherith,  which  is  be- 
fore Jordan  ;2  then  at  "  Zarephath  which  belongs  to  Zidon ;" 
and  though  he  does  at  last,  when  his  case  seems  desperate, 
and  his  hours  are  numbered  by  Jezebel's  sentence  "come 
in  haste  to  Beer-sheba,  which  belongeth  to  Judah,"?  still  it 
is  after  a  manner  which  bespeaks  his  reluctance  to  set  foot 
within  that  territory,  even  more  than  if  he  had  evaded  it 
altogether.  Tarry  he  will  not ;  he  separates  from  his  ser- 
vaut,  probably  for  the  greater  security  of  both  ;  eroesaday's 

1  1  Kings  xviii.  40;  xix.  2. 

2  It  ietruc  that  there  is  a  great  difference  of  opinion  as  to  the  situation  of 
this  brook  Cherith ;  but  from  the  direction  given  to  Elijah  being  to  turn 
Easticard,  when  he  was  to  go  there,  he  being  at  the  time  in  Samaria,  it  is 
clear  that  it  could  not  be  in  Judah. — Consult  Lightfoot,  Vol.  n.  318,  fol. 

3  1  Kings  xix.  3. 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  -  195 

journey  into  the  wilderness,  and  forlorn,  and  spirit-broken 
and  alone,  begs  that  he  may  die  ;  then  he  wanders  away, 
being  so  taught  of  God,  forty  days  and  forty  nights,  till  he 
comes  to  Horeb,  the  Mount  of  God,  and  there  conceals  him- 
self in  a  cave.  Now  all  this  is  at  first  sight  very  strange 
and  unaccountable ;  strange  and  unaccountable,  that  the 
Prophet  of  God  should  so  studiously  avoid  Judah,  the  peo- 
ple of  God,  governed  as  it  then  was  by  Jehoshaphat,  a 
prince  who  walked  with  God,1 — Judah  being  of  all  others 
a  shelter  the  nearest  and  most  convenient.  How  is  it  to 
be  explained? 

I  doubt  not  by  this  fact ;  that  Jehoshaphat  king  of 
Judah  had  already  married,  or  was  then  upon  the  point  of 
marrying,  his  son  Jehoram  to  Athaliah,  the  daughter  of 
this  very  Ahab,  and  this  very  Jezebel,  who  were  seeking 
Elijah's  life  ;2  his,  therefore,  was  not  now  the  kingdom  in 
which  Elijah  could  feel  that  a  residence  was  safe ;  for  by 
this  ill-omened  match  (such  it  proved)  the  houses  of  Je- 
hoshophat  and  Ahab  were  so  strictly  identified,  that  we 
find  the  former,  when  solicited  by  Ahab  to  join  him  in  an 
expedition  against  Ramoth-gilead,  expressing  himself  in 
such  terms  as  these :  "  I  am  as  thou  art,  my  people  as  thy 
people,  my  horses  as  thy  horses  ;"3  and  in  allusion,  as  it 
should  seem,  to  this  fraternity  of  the  two  kings,  Jehosha- 
phat is  in  one  place  actually  called  "King  of  Israel."4 

It  may  be  demonstrated  that  this  fatal  marriage  (for 
such  it  was  in  its  consequences)  was,  at  any  rate,  con- 
tracted not  later  than  the  tenth  or  eleventh  of  Ahab's 
reign,  and  it  might  have  been  much  earlier;  whilst  these 
scenes  in  the  life  of  Elijah  could  not  have  occurred  within 
the  first  few  years  of  that,  reign,  seeing  that  Ahab  had  to 

1  2  Kings  xxii.  43.  2  lb.  viii.  18  ;  2  Chron.  xviii.  1. 

3  1  Kings  xxii.  4.  *  2  Chron.  xxi.  2. 


196  THE    VERACITY    OF   THE  PART    II. 

fill  up  the  measure  of  his  wickedness  after  he  came  to  the 
throne,  before  the  Prophet  was  commissioned  to  take  up 
his  parable  against  him.  I  mention  these  two  facts,  as 
lending  to  prove  that  the  exile  of  Elijah  could  not  have 
fallen  out  long,  if  at  all,  before  the  marriage  ;  and  there- 
fore that  the  latter  event,  whether  past  or  in  prospect, 
might  well  bear  upon  it.  I  say  that  it  may  be  proved  that 
this  marriage  was  not  later  than  the  tenth  or  eleventh  of 
Ahab — for 

1.  Ahaziab,  the  fruit,  of  the  marriage,  the  son  of  Jehoram 
and  Athaliah.  began  to  reign  in  the  twelfth  year  of  Joram. 
son  of  Ahab,  king  of  Israel.1 

2.  But  Joram  began  to  reign  in  the  eighteenth  year  of 
Jehoshaphat  king  of  Judah.2 

3.  Therefore,  the  twelfth  of  Joram  would  answer  to  the 
thirtieth  of  Jehoshaphat,  (had  the  latter  reigned  so  long ; 
it,  did,  in  fact,  answer  to  the  seventh  of  Jehoram,  the  son 
of  Jehoshaphat  ;3  but  there  is  no  need  to  perplex  the  com- 
putation by  any  reference  to  this  reign;)  and  accordingly 
Ahaziah  must  have  begun  his  reign  in  what  would  corres- 
pond to  the  thirtieth  of  Jehoshaphat.' 

4.  But  he  was  twenty-two  when  he  began  it.  There- 
fore he  must  have  been  born  about  the  eighth  year  of  Je- 
hoshaphat ;  and  consequently  the  marriage  of  Jehoram 
and  Athaliah,  which  gave  birth  to  him,  must  have  been 
contracted  at  least  as  early  as  the  sixth  or  seventh  of  Je- 
hoshaphat. 

5.  Now  Jehoshaphat  began  to  reign  in  the  fourth  of 
Ahab,  king  of  Israel ;  therefore  the  marriage  must  have 
been  solemnized  as  early  as  the  tenth  or  eleventh  of  Ahab 
— how  much  earlier  it  was  solemnized,  in  fact,  we  cannot 
tell;  but  the  result  is  extremely  curious:  and  without  the 

i  2  Kings  viii.  25,  26.  -1  lb.  iii.  1. 

3  Conip.  2  Kings  iii.  1 ;  viii.  18.     1  Kings  xxii.  42. 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  197 

most  remote  allusion  to  it  on  the  part  of  the  sacred  histo- 
rian, as  being  an  incident  in  any  way  governing  the  move-  ■ 
ments  of  Elijah,  it  does  furnish,  when  we  are  once  in  pos- 
session of  it,  a  most  satisfactory  explanation  of  the  shyness 
of  Elijah  to  look  for  a  refuge  in  a  country  where,  almost 
under  any  other  circumstances,  it  was  the  most  natural  he 
should  have  sought  one;  and,  where,  at  any  other  time, 
since  the  division  of  the  kingdoms,  he  certainly  would  have 
found  not  only  a  refuge,  but  a  welcome. 


XX. 

I  have  already  advanced  several  arguments  for  the 
truth  of  that  remarkable  portion  of  Scripture  which  tell, 
the  history  of  the  great  prophet  Elijah,  and  showed,  that 
on  comparing  some  of  the  reputed  events  of  his  life  with 
the  political  and  domestic  state  of  his  country  at  the  time, 
the  reality  of  those  events  was  established  beyond  all  rea- 
sonable doubt.     But  I  have  not  yet  done  with  this  part  of 
my  subject;  and  I  press  on  the  notice  of  my  readers  one 
again,  as  I  have  repeatedly  pressed  it  before,  the  considera- 
tion that  these  casual  indications  of  truth,  found  in   the 
very  midst  of  miracles  the  most  striking,  give  great  support 
to  the  credibility  of  those  miracles;  that  the  portions  of 
the  history  on  which  these  seals  of  truth  are  set,  combine 
with  the  other  and  more  extraordinary  portions  so  inti- 
mately, that  if  the  former  are  to  be  received,  the  latter  can- 
not be  rejected  without  extreme  violence,  and   laceration 
of  the  whole:  that  standing  or  falling,  they  must  stand  or 
rail  together. 

T  spoke  before  of  the  flight  of  Elijah,  and  gave  my  rea- 
sons for  believing  it.  I  speak  now  of  a  trifling  incident  in 
that  magnificent  scene  which  is  said  to  have  been  the  pro- 

17* 


198  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    II. 

logue  to  his  flight.  This  it  is.  Twelve  barrels  of  water, 
at  the  command  of  the  prophet,  are  poured  upon  the  sacri- 
fice, and  fill  the  trench.  But  is  it  not  a  strange  thing,  that 
at  a  moment  of  drought  so  intense,  when  the  king  himself 
raid  the  governor  of  his  house,  trusting  the  business  to  no 
inferior  agent,  actually  undertook  to  examine  with  their 
own  eyes  the  watering-places  throughout  all  the  land,  di- 
viding it  between  them,  to  see  if  they  could  save  the  re- 
mainder of  the  cattle  alive  ;J  when  the  prophet  had  been 
long  before  compelled  to  leave  Cherith,  because  the  brook 
was  dried  up,  and  for  no  reason  else,  and  to  crave  at  the 
hands  of  the  widow-woman  of  Zarephath,  whither  he  had 
removed,  though  a  land  of  danger  to  him,  a  little  water  in 
a  vessel  that  he  might  drink  ;  is  it  not,  I  say,  a  gross  oversight 
in  the  sacred  writer,  to  make  Elijah,  at  such  a  time,  give  or- 
der for  this  wanton  waste  of  water  above  all  things,  whereof 
scarcely  a  drop  was  to  be  found  to  cool  the  tongue ;  and 
not  only  so.  but  to  describe  it  as  forthcoming  at  once,  ap- 
parently without  any  search  made,  an  ample  and  abundant 
reservoir  ?2  How  can  these  things  be  ?  Let  us  but  remem- 
ber the  local  position  of  Carmel,  tbat  it  stood  upon  the  coast, 
as  an  incidental  remark  in  the  course  of  the  narrative  tes- 
tifies :  that  the  water  was  therefore  probably  sea-xcater; 
and  all  the  difficulty  disappears.  But  the  historian  does 
not  trouble  himself  to  satisfy  our  surprise,  being  altogether 
unconscious  that  he  has  given  any  cause  for  it ;  he,  honest 
man  as  he  was,  tells  his  tale,  a  faithful  one  as  he  feels, 
and  the  objection  which  we  have  alleged,  and  which  a 
single  word  would  have  extinguished,  he  leaves  to  shock 
us  as  it  may,  nothing  heeding. 

But  would  not.  an  impostor  have  preserved  the  keeping 

1  1  Kings,  xviii.  5. 

2  Bishop  Hall  in  his  Contemplations  shows  himself  aware  of  the  diffi- 
culty in  this  passage,  but  not  of  its  probable  solution.    B.  xviii.  Comtempl.  7, 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  199 

of  his  picture  better,  and  been  careful  not  to  violate  seem- 
ing probabilities  by  this  prodigal  profusion  of  water,  whilst 
his  action  was  laid  in  a  miraculous  drought,  for  the  re- 
moval  of  which,  indeed,  this  very  sacrifice  was  offered — 
or,  if  of  these  twelve  barrels  he  must  needs  speak,  by  way 
of  silencing-  all  insinuation,  that  the  whole  was  a  scene 
got  up,  and  that  fire  was  secreted,  would  he  not  have 
studiously  told  us,  at  least,  that  the  water  was  from  the 
sea  which  lay  at  the  foot  of  Carmel,  and  thus  have  guarded 
himself  against  sceptical  remarks  ?  Now  when  I  see  this 
momentous  period  of  Elijah's  ministry  compassed  in  on 
every  side  with  tokens  of  truth  so  satisfactory  ;  when  I 
see  so  much  in  his  history  established  as  matter  of  fact, 
am  I  to  consider  all  that  is  not  so  established-  merely  be- 
cause materials  are  wanting  for  the  purpose,  as  matters  of 
fiction  only  ?  Or,  taking  my  stand  upon  the  good  faith 
with  which  his  flight,  at  least,  is  recorded,  an  event  which, 
in  itself,  I  look  upon  as  proved  beyond  all  reasonable  doubt 
by  a  former  coincidence ;  or  upon  the  good  faith  with 
which  his  challenge  at  Carmel  is  recorded,  an  event  not 
unsatisfactorily  confirmed  by  this  coincidence ;  or  rather 
upon  the  veracity  of  both  facts,  shall  I  not  feel  my  way 
along  from  the  prophet's  recoil  on  setting  foot  in  Judah,  to 
the  anger  of  Jezebel,  with  whom  Judah  was  then  in  close 
alliance  ;  from  this  anger  of  hers,  to  the  cause  assigned 
for  it  in  the  slaughter  of  her  priests  ;  from  the  slaughter 
of  her  priests,  to  the  authority  by  which  he  did  the  deed, 
himself  a  defenceless  individual,  in  a  country  full  of  the 
inveterate  worshippers  of  the  god  of  those  priests  ;  and 
thus,  finally,  shall  T  not  ascend  to  the  mighty  miracle  by 
which  that  authority  was  conveyed  to  him,  God  in  pledge 
thereof  touching  the  mountain  that  it  smoked  1 


200  THE    VERACITY    OF   THE  PART    II. 


XXI. 

Towards  the  end  of  the  famine  caused  by  this  drought 
Elijah  is  commanded  by  God  to  "get  him  to  Zerephath, 
which  belongeth  to  Zidon,  and  dwell  there  ;  where  a 
widow-woman  was  to  sustain  him."1  He  goes  ;  finds  the 
woman  gathering  sticks  near  the  gates  of  the  city ;  and 
asks  her  to  fetch  him  a  little  water  and  a  morsel  of  bread. 
She  replies,  "  As  the  Lord  thy  God  liveth,  I  have  not  a 
cake,  but  an  handful  of  meal  in  a  barrel,  and  a  little  oil  in 
a  cruse  :  and,  behold,  I  am  gathering  two  sticks,  that  1 
may  go  in  and  dress  it  for  me  and  my  son,  that  we  may 
eat  it,  and  die."2 

This  widow-woman  then  dwelt  at  Zarephath,  or  Sa- 
repta,  it  seems,  which  belongeth  to  Zidon.  Now  from  a 
passage  in  the  book  of  Joshua3  we  learn  that  the  district 
of  Zidon,  in  the  division  of  the  land  of  Canaan,  fell  to  the 
lot  of  Asher.  Let  us  then  turn  to  the  thirty-third  chapter 
of  Deuteronomy,  where  Moses  blesses  the  Tribes,  and  see 
the  character  he  gives  of  this  part  of  the  country  :  "  of 
Asher  he  said,  Let  Asher  be  blessed  with  children  ;  let  him 
be  acceptable  to  his  brethren,  and  let  him  dip  Ids  foot  in 
oil  ;"4  indicating  the  future  fertility  of  that  region,  and  the 
nature  of  its  principal  crop.  It  is  likely,  therefore,  that  at 
the  end  of  a  dearth,  of  three  years  and  a  half,  oil  should 
be  found  there,  if  anywhere.  Yet  this  symptom  of  truth 
occurs  once  more  as  an  ingredient  in  a  miraculous  history 
— for  the  oil  was  made  not  to  fail  till  the  rain  came.  The 
incident  itself  is  a  very  minute  one  ;  and  minute  as  it  is, 
only  discovered  to  be  a  coincidence  by  the  juxtaposition  of 
several  texts  from  several  books  of  Scripture.     It  would 

i  1  Kings  xvii.  9.  2  lb.  xvii.  12. 

3  Josh.  xix.  28.  4  Deut.  xxxiii.  24. 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  201 

require  a  very  circumspect  forger  of  the  story  to  introduce 
the  mention  of  the  oil ;  and  when  he  had  introduced  it, 
not  to  be  tempted  to  betray  himself  by  throwing  out  some 
slight  hint  why  he  had  done  so. 


XXII. 

Not  long  after  this  period,  the  history  of  Elisha  fur- 
nishes us  with  a  coincidence  characteristic,  I  think,  of 
truth.  It  appears  that  «  a  great  woman"  of  Shechem 
had  befriended  the  prophet,  finding  him  and  his  servant, 
from  time  to  time,  as  they  passed  by  that  place,  food  and 
lodging.  In  return  for  this  he  sends  her  a  message,  "  Be- 
hold thou  hast  been  careful  for  us  with  all  this  care ; 
what  is  to  be  done  for  thee  1  wouldest  thou  be  spoken  for 
to  the  king,  or  to  the  captain  of  the  host  Tn  Now  we 
should  have  gathered  from  previous  passages  in  Elisha's 
history,  that  Jehoram,  who  was  then  king  of  Israel,  was 
not  one  with  whom  he  was  upon  such  terms  as  this  pro- 
position to  the  Shunammite  implies.  Jehoram  was  the 
son  of  Ahab,  his  old  master  Elijah's  enemy,  and  appar- 
ently no  friend  of  his  own  ;  for  when  the  three  kings,  the 
king  of  Israel,  the  king  of  Judah,  and  the  king  of  Edom, 
in  their  distress  for  water,  in  their  expedition  against 
Moab,  wished  to  inquire  of  the  Lord  through  Elisha,  his 
answer  to  the  king  of  Israel  was,  "  As  the  Lord  of  hosts 
liveth,  before  whom  I  stand,  surely  were  it  not  that  I  re- 
gard the  presence  of  Jehoshaphat  the  king  of  Judah,  / 
would  not  look  toward  thee,  nor  see  thee."2  What  then 
had  occurred  in  the  interval  betwixt  this  avowal,  and  his 
proposal  to  the  Shunammite  to  use  his  influence  in  her 

1  2  Kings  iv.  13.  a  lb.  iii.  14. 


202  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    II. 

favor  at  court,  which  had  changed  his  position  with  re- 
spect to  the  king  of  Israel  1  It  may  be  supposed  that  it 
was  the  sudden  supply  of  water,  which  he  had  furnished 
these  kings  with,  by  God's  permission,  thus  saving  the  ex- 
pedition ;  and  the  defeat  of  the  enemy,  to  which  it  had 
been  instrumental.1  This  would  naturally  make  Elisha 
feel  that  the  king  of  Israel  was  under  obligations  to  him, 
and  that  he  could  ask  a  slight  favor  of  him  without  seem- 
ing to  sanction  the  character  of  the  man  by  doing  so. 
And  this  solution  of  the  case  appears  to  be  the  more  prob- 
able, from  Elisha  coupling  the  '•'  captain  of  the  host"  with 
the  king  ;  as  though  his  interest  was  equally  good  with 
him  too,  which  he  might  reasonably  consider  it  to  be, 
when  he  had  done  the  army  such  signal  service. 


XXIII. 

A  word  upon  the  marriage  of  which  I  spoke  in  a 
former  paragraph.  Evil  was  the  day  for  Judah  when  the 
son  of  Jehoshaphat  took  for  a  wife  the  daughter  of  Ahab, 
and  of  Jezebel,  ten  times  the  daughter.  Singular,  indeed, 
is  the  hideous  resemblance  of  Athaliah  to  her  mother, 
though  our  attention  is  not  at  all  directed  to  the  likeness  ; 
and  were  the  fidelity  of  the  history  staked  upon  the  few 
incidents  in  it  which  relate  to  this  female  fiend,  it  would 
be  safe — so  characteristic  are  they  of  the  child  of  Jezebel 
— the  same  thirst  for  blood  ;  the  same  lust  of  dominion, 
whether  in  the  state  or  the  household  ;  the  same  unfem- 
inine  influence  over  the  kings  their  husbands;  Jezebel, 
the  setter-up  of  Baal  in  Israel ;  Athaliah  in  Judah — those 
bitter  fountains,  from  which  disasters  innumerable  flowed 

i  2  Kings  iii.  16,  17. 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  203 

to  either  kingdom,1  preparing  the  one  for  a  Shalmanezer, 
the  other  for  a  Nebuchadnezzar.     But  this  by  the  way. 
Whatever  might  be  the  motive  which  induced  so  good  a 
prince  as  Jehoshaphat  to  sanction  this  alliance  ;  whether, 
indeed,  it  was  of  choice,  and  in  the  hope  of  re-uniting  the 
two  kingdoms,  which  is  probable  ;  or  whether  it  was  of 
compulsion,  the  act  of  an  impetuous  son,  and  not  his  own 
—for   the   subsequent  history  of  Jchoram  shows  how  little 
he  was  disposed  to  yield  to  his  father's  will,  when  his  own 
was  thwarted  by  it2— certain  it  is  that  it  proved  a  sad 
epoch   in  the  fate  and  fortunes  of  Judah  ;  a  calamity  al- 
most as  withering  in  its  effects  upon  I  hat  kingdom,  as  the 
sin  of  Jeroboam  had  been  upon  his  own.     Up  to  the  time 
of  Jehoshaphat,  Judah  had  prospered  exceedingly  ;    hence- 
forward  there  is  a  taint  of  Baal  introduced  into  the  blood 
royal,  and  a   curse  for  a  long  time,  though  not  without 
intermissions,  seems  to   rest    upon    the   land.     The  even 
march  with  which  the  two  kingdoms  now  advance  hand 
in  hand  is  early  seen  ;  they  were  now  bent  upon  grinding 
at  the  same   mill ;  and  a  remarkable  instance  of  coind- 
dence  without  design  here  presents  itself,  which  the  gen- 
eral observations  I  have  been  making  may  serve  to  intro- 
duce. 

1.  Ahaziah,  the  son  of  Ahab,  I  read,3  began  to  reign 
over  Israel  in  Samaria  in  the  seventeenth  year  of  Jehosha- 
phat king  of  Judah. 

2.  But  Jehoram,  the  son  of  Ahab,  began  to  reign  over 
Israel  in  Samaria  in  the  eighteenth  year  of  Jehoshaphat 
king  of  Judah,  his  brother  Ahaziah  being  dead.* 

3.  Elsewhere,  however,  it  is  said  that  this  Jehoram,  the 
son  of  Ahab,  began  to  reign  in  the  second  year  of  Jehoram 
son  of  Jehoshaphat  king  of  Judah.' 

>  See  Hosea  xiii.  1.         2  2  Chron.  xxi.  3,  4.         3  i  Kings  ixii.  31. 
«  2  Kings  iii.  I .  s  ib.  i.  17. 


204  THE    VERACITY   OF   THE  PART  II. 

4.  Therefore,  the  second  year  of  Jehorain  son  of  Je- 
hoshaphat  must  have  corresponded  with  the  eighteenth  of 
Jehoshaphat ;  or,  in  other  words,  Jehoram  must  have  begun 
to  reign  in  the  seventeenth  of  Jehoshaphat. 

It  is  obvious  that  the  maze  of  dates  and  names  thus 
brought  together  from  various  places  in  Scripture,  through 
which  the  argument  is  to  be  pursued,  renders  all  con- 
trivance, collusion,  or  packing  of  facts,  for  the  purpose  of 
supporting  a  conclusion,  utterly  impossible.  Now  the  re- 
sult of  the  whole  is  this,  that  Ahaziah,  the  son  of  Ahab 
king  of  Israel,  and  Jehoram,  the  son  of  Jehoshaphat  king 
of  Judah,  both  began  to  reign  in  the  same  year,  in  the 
respective  kingdoms  of  their  fathers,  their  fathers  being 
nevertheless  themselves  alive,  and  active  sovereigns  at 
the  time.  Is  there  anything  by  which  this  simultaneous 
adoption  of  these  young  men  to  be  their  fathers'  colleagues 
can  be  accounted  for  ?  An  identity  so  remarkable  in  the 
proceedings  of  the  confederate  kingdoms,  can  scarcely  be 
accidental.  Let  us  then  endeavor  to  ascertain  what  event 
was  in  progress  in  the  seventeenth  year  of  Jehoshaphat, 
the  year  in  which  the  two  appointments  were  made. 

Now  Jehoshaphat  began  to  reign  in  the  fourth  of  Ahab.1 
But  Ahab  died  in  the  great  battle  against  Ramoth-gilead, 
having  reigned  twenty-two  years  ;2  he  died  therefore  in 
the  eighteenth  of  Jehoshaphat. 

Accordingly,  in  the  seventeenth  of  that  monarch,  the 
year  in  which  we  are  concerned,  the  two  kings  were  pre- 
paring to  go  up  against  Ramotb, — a  measure  upon  which 
they  did  not  venture  without  long  and  grave  deliberation, 
concentration  of  forces,  application  to  prophets  touching 
their  prospects  of  success.3 

But  when  they  approached  this  hazardous  enterprise  in 

i  1  Kings  xxii.  41.  2  lb.  xvi.  29.  3  ib.  xxii. 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  205 

a  spirit  so  cautious,  can  anything  be  more  probable,  than 
that  each  monarch  should  then  have  made  his  son  a  part- 
ner of  his  throne,  in  order  that,  during  his  own  absence 
with  the  army,  there  might  be  one  left  behind  to  rule  at 
home,  and  in  case  of  the  father's  death  in  battle,  (Ahab 
did  actually  fall,)  to  reign  in  his  stead?  There  can  be 
little  or  no  doubt  that  this  is  the  true  solution  of  the  case, 
though  the  text  itself  of  the  narrative  does  not  contain 
the  slightest  intimation  that  it  is  so. 


XXIV 

Such  arrangements,  indeed,  were  not  unusual  in  those 
days  and  in  those  countries.  Here  is  a  further  proof  of  it, 
and  at  the  same  time  a  coincidence  which  is  a  companion 
to  the  last. 

1.  "  In  the  thirty-seventh  year  of  Joash  king  of  Judah 
began  Jehoash.  the  son  of  Jehoahaz,  to  reign  over  Israel 
in  Samaria."  So  we  are  told  in  one  passage.1  But,  in 
another,2  that,  "  In  the  second  year  of  Joash  (Jehoash), 
the  son  of  Jehoahaz,  king  of  Israel,  reigned  Amaziah,  the 
son  of  Joash,  king  of  Judah." 

2.  Therefore,  Amaziah,  king  of  Judah,  reigned  in  the 
thirty-ninth  of  Joash,  king  of  Judah. 

3.  Now  we  learn  from  a  passage  in  the  second  Book  of 
Chronicles,3  that "  Joash  reigned  forty  years  in  Jerusalem." 

4.  Therefore  Amaziah  must  have  begun  to  reign  one 
year  at  least  before  the  death  of  his  father  Joash. 

Can  we  discover  any  reason  for  this  ?  The  clue  will  be 
found  in  a  parenthesis  of  half  a  line,  which  the  following 
paragraph  in  the  Chronicles  presents :   "  And  it  came  to 

1  2  Kings  xiii.  10.  2  lb.  xiv.  1.  3  2  Chron.  xxiv.  1. 

18 


206  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    II. 

pass  at  the  end  of  the  year,  that  the  host  of  Syria  came 
up  against  him  (Joash) ;  and  they  came  to  Jerusalem,  and 
destroyed  all  the  princes  of  the  people. . . .  And  when  they 
were  departed  from  him  (for  they  left  him  in  great  dis- 
eases) his  own  servants  conspired  against  him,  for  the 
blood  of  the  sons  of  Jehoiada  the  priest,  and  slew  him  on 
his  bed,  and  he  died."1 

The  great  diseases  therefore  under  which,  it  seems, 
Josah  was  laboring  at  the  moment  of  the  Syrian  invasion, 
presents  itself  as  the  probable  cause  why  Amaziah  his  son, 
then  in  the  flower  of  his  age,  was  admitted  to  a  share  in 
the  government  a  little  before  his  time.  Yet  how  circuit- 
ously  do  we  arrive  at  this  conclusion  !  The  Book  of  Kings 
alone  would  not  establish  it ;  the  Book  of  Chronicles  alone 
would  not  establish  it.  From  the  former,  we  might  learn 
when  Amaziah  began  to  reign  ;  from  the  latter,  when 
Joash,  the  father  of  Amaziah,  died ;  and  accordingly,  a 
comparison  of  the  two  dates  would  enable  us  to  determine 
that  the  reign  of  Amaziah  began  before  that  of  Joash 
ended  ;  hut  neither  document  asserts  the  fact  that  the  son 
did  reign  conjointly  with  the  father.  We  infer  it,  that  is 
all.  Neither  does  the  Book  of  Kings  make  the  least  al- 
lusion to  any  accident  whatever  which  rendered  this  co- 
partnership necessary  ;  nor  yet  the  Book  of  Chronicles  di- 
rectly, only  an  incidental  parenthesis,  a  word  or  two  in 
length,  intimates  that  at  the  time  of  the  Syrian  invasion 
Joash  was  sick. 

I  have  adduced  this  coincidence,  strong  in  itself,  chiefly 
in  illustration  and  confirmation  of  the  principles  upon  which 
the  last  proceeded ;  the  simultaneous  and  premature  as- 
sumption of  the  sceptre  by  the  sons  of  Jehoshaphat  and 
Ahab,  as  compared  with  the  date  of  the  combined  expedi- 

i  2  Chron.  xxiv.  23  25. 


PRAT      I.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  207 

tion  of  those  two  kings  against  Ramoth-gilead.  But  I 
must  not  dismiss  the  subject  altogether  without  calling 
your  attention  to  the  undesignedncss  manifested  in  either 
case.  Nothing  can  be  more  latent  than  the  congruity,  such 
as  it  is,  which  is  here  found  ;  either  history  might  be  read 
a  thousand  times  without  a  suspicion  that  any  such  con- 
gruity was  there ;  investigation  is  absolutely  necessary  for 
this  discovery  of  it ;  patient  disembroilment  of  a  labyrinth 
of  names,  many  being  identical,  where  the  parties  are  not 
the  same  :  scrutiny  and  comparison  of  dates,  seldom  so 
given  as  to  expedite  the  labors  of  the  inquirer.  All  this 
must  be  done,  or  these  singular  tokens  of  truth  escape  us, 
and  many,  I  doubt  not,  do  escape  us,  after  all.  What  im- 
posture can  be  here?  What  contrivers  could  be  prepared 
for  such  a  sifting  of  their  plausible  disclosures  ?  What 
pretenders  could  be  provided  with  such  vouchers  ;  or  hav- 
ing provided  them,  would  bury  them  so  deep  as  that  they 
should  run  the  risk  of  never  being  brought  to  light  at  all, 
and  thus  frustrate  their  own  end  in  the  fabrication  ? 

Once  more  I  commit  to  my  readers  facts  which  speak,  I 
think,  to  the  truth  of  Scripture,  as  things  having  authority ; 
facts,  which  afford  proof  infallible  that  there  is  a  mine  of 
evidence,  {  deep  things  of  God,'  in  this  sense,  in  the  sacred 
writings,  which  they  who  look  upon  them  with  a  hasty 
and  impatient  glance — and  such  very  generally  is  the 
manner  of  sceptics,  and  almost  always  the  manner  of  youth- 
ful sceptics, — leave  under  their  feet  un worked  ;  a  treasure 
hid  in  a  field  which  they  only  who  will  be  at  the  pains  to 
dig  for  it  will  find. 

But  if  an  investigation,  such  as  this  that  we  are  conduct- 
ing, leads  to  such  a  conclusion — to  a  conclusion,  I  mean, 
that  there  is  a  substratum  of  truth  running  through  the 
Bible,  which  none  can  discover  but  he  who  will  patiently 
and  perseveringly  sink  the  well  at  the  bottom  of  which  it 


208  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    II. 

lies — and  such  is  the  conclusion  at  which  we  must  arrive 
— is  it  not  a  lamentable  thing  to  hear,  as  we  are  sometimes 
condemned  to  hear  it,  the  superficial  objection,  or  supercil- 
ious scoff,  proceeding  from  the  mouth  of  one  whose  very 
speech  bewrays  that  he  has  walked  over  the  surface  of  his 
subject  merely,  if  even  that,  and  who  nevertheless  pretends 
and  proclaims  that  truth  he  finds  not? 

ft 

XXV 

In  considering  the  political  and  religious  condition  of  the 
two  kingdoms  after  the  division,  I  have  looked  at  the  es- 
tablishment of  the  calves  at  Bethel  and  Dan  by  Jeroboam 
as  a  great  national  epoch  ;  as  a  measure  pregnant  with 
consequences  far  more  numerous  and  more  important,  fetch- 
ing a  much  larger  compass,  and  affecting  many  more  inter- 
ests, than  its  author  probably  contemplated.  I  have  now 
to  fix  upon  another  event,  the  wide  wasting  effects  of  which 
I  have  already  hinted  as  another  national  crisis,  one  which, 
in  the  end,  most  materially  influenced  the  fortunes  both  of 
Israel  and  Judah  ;  the  thing  in  itself  apparently  a  trifle  ; 
"  but  God,"  says  Bishop  Hall,  "  lays  small  accidents  as 
foundations  for  greater  designs ;"  I  speak  of  the  marriage 
between  Ahab  and  Jezebel. — It  is  thus  announced — "  And 
it  came  to  pass,  as  if  it  had  been  a  light  thing  for  him  to 
walk  in  the  sins  of  Jeroboam  the  son  of  Nebat,  that  he  took 
to  wife  Jezebel,  the  daughter  of  Ethbaal,  king  of  the  Zido- 
nians,  and  went  and  served  Baal,  and  worshipped  him. 
And  he  reared  up  an  altar  for  Baal  in  the  house  of  Baal, 
which  he  had  built  in  Samaria.  And  Ahab  made  a  grove 
— and  Ahab  did  more  to  provoke  the  Lord  God  of  Israel  to 
anger  than  all  the  kings  of  Israel  that  were  before  him."1 

1  1  Kings  xvi  31. 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  209 

Here  we  have  the  beginning  of  a  new  and  more  pestilent 
idolatry  in  Israel.  The  Zidonian  queen  corrupts  the  coun- 
try to  which  she  is  unhappily  translated,  with  her  own 
rooted  heathenish  abominations,  and  priests  of  Baal,  and 
prophets  of  Baal,  being  under  her  own  special  protection 
and  encouragement;  multiply  exceedingly  ;  and  so  seduc- 
tive did  the  voluptuous  worship  prove,  that,  with  the  ex- 
ception of  seven  thousand  persons,  all  Israel  had,  more  or 
less,  partaken  in  her  sin.  Jeroboam's  calf  had  been  a  base 
and  sordid  representative  of  God,  but  a  representative  still ; 
Jezebel's  Baal  was  an  audacious  rival.  Nevertheless,  Is- 
rael could  not  find  in  their  hearts  to  put  away  the  God  of 
their  fathers  altogether ;  and  accordingly  we  hear  Elijah 
exclaim,  (:  How  long  halt  ye  between  two  opinions  ?  if  the 
Lord  be  God,  follow  him,  and  if  Baal,  then  follow  him."1 

I  do  not  think  sufficient  notice  has  been  taken  of  the 
curious  manner  in.  which  this  sudden  ejaculation  of  the 
prophet  corresponds  with  a  number  of  unconnected  inci- 
dents, characteristic  of  the  times,  which  lie  scattered  over 
the  Books  of  Kings  and  Chronicles.  I  shall  collect  a  few 
of  them,  that  it  may  be  seen  how  well  their  confronted 
testimony  agrees  together,  and  how  strictly,  but  undesign- 
edly, they  all  coincide  with  that  state  of  public  opinion 
upon  religious  matters  which  the  words  of  Elijah  express, 
a  halt 'nig  opinion. 

Thus,  in  the  scene  on  Mount  Carmel,  we  find,  that  after 
the  priests  of  Baal  had  in  vain  besought  their  god  to  give 
proof  of  himself,  and  it  now  became  Elijah's  turn  to  act 
"He  repaired  the  altar  of  the  Lord  that  was  broken 
down,"-  as  though  here,  on  the  top  of  Carmel,  were  the 
remains  of  an  altar  to  the  true  God,  (one  of  those  high 
places  tolerated,  however  questionably,  by  some  even  of 

1  l  Kings  xviii.  21.  a  n>.  xviiL  30. 

18* 


210  THE    VERACITY    OF   THE  PART  II. 

the  most  religious  kings,)  which  had  been  superseded  by 
an  altar  to  Baal  since  Ahab's  reign  had  begun  ;  the  prophet 
not  having  to  build,  it  seems,  but  only  to  renew.  And 
agreeably  to  this,  we  have  Obadiah,  the  governor  of  Ahab's 
own  house,  represented  as  a  man  "who  feared  the  Lord 
greatly,  and  saved  the  prophets  of  the  Lord ;"  he,  therefore, 
no  apostate,  but  Ahab,  in  consideration  of  his  fidelity, 
winking  at  his  faith ;  perhaps,  indeed,  himself  not  so  much 
sold  to  Baal-worship,  as  sold  into  the  hands  of  an  imperious 
woman,  who  would  hear  of  no  other.  And  so  "Ahab 
served  Baal  a  little"  said  Jehu,  his  successor,1  another  of 
the  equivocal  tokens  of  the  times  ;  whilst  the  command  of 
this  same  Jehu,  that  the  temple  of  Baal  should  be  searched 
before  the  slaughter  of  the  idolaters  began,-  lest  there  should 
be  there  any  of  the  worshippers  of  the  Lord,  instead  of 
the  worshij)pers  of  Baal  only,  still  argues  the  prevalence 
of  the  same  half  measure  of  faith.  Moreover,  the  charac- 
ter of  the  four  hundred  prophets  of  Ahab,  which,  by  its 
contradictions,  has  so  much  perplexed  the  commentators ; 
their  number  corresponding  with  that  of  those  who  ate  at 
Jezebel's  table  ;  their  parable,  nevertheless,  taken  up  in  the 
Lord's  name  ;  still  their  veracity  suspected  by  Jehoshaphat, 
who  asks  if  "  there  be  no  prophet  of  the  Lord  besides ;" 
and  the  mutual  ill-will  which  manifests  itself  between 
them  and  Micaiah  ;  are  all  very  expressive  features  of  the 
same  doubtful  mind.2  Then  the  pretence  by  which  Ahab, 
through  Jezebel,  takes  away  the  life  of  Naboth,  is  "  bias- 
phi >ny  against  God  and  the  king,"  against  the  true  God, 
no  doubt,  the  tyrant  availing  herself  of  a  clause  in  the 
I  iC\  itical  law  f  a  law  which  was  still,  therefore,  as  it  should 
seem,  the  law  of  the  land,  even  in  the  kingdom  of  Israel, 

i  2  KingB.  x.  18. 

2  1  Kings  xviii.  19  ;  xxii.  6—24 ;  2  Chron.  xviii.  10—23. 

8  Levit.  xxiv.  16. 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  211 

howbeit  standing  in  the  anomalous  position  of  deriving  its 
authority  from  an  acknowledgment  of  Jehovah  alone,  and 
yet  left  to  struggle  against  the  established  worship  of  Baal, 
too  ;  enough  in  itself  to  confound  the  people,  to  compromise 
all  religious  distinctions,  and  to  insure  a  halting  creed  in 
whatever  nation  it  obtained.  Thus,  whilst  I  see  the  prophets 
of  the  Lord  cutoff  under  the  warrant  of  Jezebel,  and  the 
government  of  the  Lord  virtually  renounced ;  at  another 
time  I  see,  as  I  have  said,  a  man  condemned  to  death  for 
blasphemy  against  the  Lord,  under  the  warrant  of  Leviti- 
cus ;  and  the  two  sons  of  an  Israelitish  woman  sold  to  her 
creditor  for  bondsmen,  under  the  same  law  ;'  and  the  lepers 
shut  out  at  the  gate  of  Samaria,  still  under  the  same,2  and 
contrary,  as  it  should  appear,  to  the  Syrian  practice ;  for 
Naaman,  though  a  leper,  does  not  seem  to  have  been  an 
outcast,  but  to  have  had  servants  about  him,  and  to  have 
executed  the  king's  commands,  and  even  to  have  expected 
Elisha  to  come  out  to  him,  and  put  his  hand  upon  the 
place.  What  can  argue  the  embarrassment  under  which 
Israel  was  laboring  in  its  religious  relations  more  clearly 
than  all  this  ? — the  law  of  Moses  acknowledged  to  be  valid, 
and  its  provisions  enforced,  though  its  claim  to  the  obe- 
dience of  the  people  only  rested  upon  having  God  for  its 
author ;  that  God  whom  Baal  was  supplanting.  Here,  I 
think,  is  truth  ;  it  would  have  been  little  to  the  purpose  to 
produce  flagrant  proofs  that  the  worship  of  God  and  the 
worship  of  Baal  prevailed  together  in  Israel ;  those  might 
have  been  the  result  of  contrivance ;  but  it  is  coincidence, 
and  undesigned  coincidence,  to  find  a  prophet  exclaiming, 
in  a  moment  of  zeal,  "  How  long  halt  ye,"  and  then  to 
find  indications,  some  of  them  grounded  upon  the  merest 
trifles  of  domestic  life,  that  the  people  did  halt. 

1  2  Kings  iv.  1 ;  Levit.  xxv.  39. 

»  lb.  vii.  3 ;  Levit.  xiii.  46 ;  xiv  3 ;  Numb.  v.  23. 


212  THE    VERACITY    OF   THE  PART    (I. 


XXVI. 

But  this  marriage  of  Ahab  and  Jezebel,  so  ruinous  to 
Israel,  was  scarcely  less  so  to  Judah  ;  for  in  Judah  the 
same  miserable  alliance  was  to  be  acted-  over  again  in  the 
next  generation,  and  with  the  very  same  consequences. 

Ahab,  Icing  of  Israel,  had  taken  to  himself  Jezebel,  a 
heathen,  for  his  wife,  and  Israel,  through  her,  became  a 
half-heathen  nation.  Jehoram,  king  of  Judah,  had  taken 
to  himself  Athaliah,  the  daughter  of  Jezebel,  worthy  in  all 
respects  of  the  mother  who  bore  her,  to  be  his  wife ;  and 
now  Judah,  in  like  manner,  and  for  the  like  cause,  fell 
away.  Of  Ahab,  it  is  said,  "  But  there  was  none  like  unto 
Ahab,  wlm  did  sell  himself  to  work  wickedness  in  the  sight 
of  the  Lord,  whom  Jezebel  his  wife  stirred  up.m  Such 
were  the  bitter  fruits  of  his  marriage.  Of  Jehoram,  it  is 
said,  "And  he  walked  in  the  ways  of  the  kings  of  Israel, 
as  did  the  house  of  Ahab,  for  the  daughter  of  Ahab  was 
his  wife,  and  he  did  evil  in  the  sight  of  the  Lord."2  Such 
in  turn  was  this  ill-omened  union  to  him  and  his.  Either 
of  these  women,  therefore,  was  the  curse  of  the  kingdom 
over  which  her  husband  ruled  ;  and  as  we  have  already 
seen  some  of  the  mischief  brought  into  Israel  (faulty  enough 
before)  by  Jezebel,  so  shall  we  now  see  still  more  brought 
into  Judah  (hitherto  a  righteous  and  prosperous  people)  by 
Athaliah,  the  daughter  of  Jezebel.  I,  however,  shall  not 
enter  into  the  subject  further  than  to  draw  from  it  what  I 
can  of  evidence. 

And  here,  before  I  proceed  further,  let  me  notice  a  cir- 
cumstance, trivial  in  itself,  which  tends,  however,  to  estab- 
lish this  reputed  alliance  of  the  houses  of  Jehoshaphat  and 

>  1  Kings  xxi.  25  a  2  Kings  viii.  18. 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  213 

Ahab,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  There  is  no  more  cause,  in- 
deed, for  calling  this  in  question,  than  any  other  historical 
incident  of  an  indifferent  nature;  but  still,  I  am  unwilling 
to  let  any  opportunity  pass  of  drawing  out  these  tokens  of 
truth,  whether  significant  or  not;  be  the  gifts  great  or 
small,  which  are  cast  into  the  treasury  of  evidence,  they 
contribute  to  swell  the  amount ;  they  contribute  to  justify 
the  general  conclusion,  that  truth  is  still  the  pervading  princi- 
ple of  the  sacred  writings,  in  minute  as  well  as  in  momen- 
tous matters,  in  things  which  are,  or  which  are  not,  of  a 
kind  to  provoke  investigation. 

I  am  told  then,  that  a  son  of  the  King  of  Judah  marries 
a  daughter  of  the  King  of  Israel.— Now  agreeably  to  this, 
for  some  time  afterwards,  I  discover  a  marked  identity  of 
names  in  the  two  families,  so  much  so,  as  to  render,  while 
it  lasts,  the  contemporary  history  of  the  two  kingdoms  ex- 
tremely complicated  and  embarrassing.     Thus,  Ahab  is 
succeeded  by  a  son  Akaziah,1  on  the  throne  of  Israel;  and 
Jehoram  is  also  succeeded  by  a  son  Akaziah,  (the  nephew 
of  the  other,)  on  the  throne  of  Judah.*     Again,  Ahaziah, 
King  of  Israel,  dies,  and  he  is  succeeded  by  a  Jehoram  ? 
but  a  Jehoram,  the  brother-in-law  of  the  former,  is  at  the 
same  moment  on  the  throne  of  Judah,  as  his  father's  col- 
league."    How  much  longer  this  mutual  interchange  of 
family  names  might  have  continued,  it  is  impossible  to  tell, 
for  Ahab's  house  was  cut  off  in  the  next  generation   by 
Jehu,  and  a  new  dynasty  was  set  up  ;  but  the  thing  itself 
is  curious;  and  however  our  patience  maybe  put°to  (lie 
proof,  in  disengaging  the  thread  of  Israel  and  Judah  at  this 
point  of  their  annals,  we  have  the  satisfaction  of  feeling 
that  the  intricacy  of  the  history  at  such  a  moment  is  a  very 
strong  argument  of  the  truth  of  the  history.     For,  although 

1  1  Kings  xxii.  49.  8  2  rjhron.  xrii.  1. 

3  2  Kings  i.  17;  Ui.  1.  «  ib.  i.  17. 


214  THE    VERACITY   OF    THE  PART    II. 

no  remark  is  made  upon  this  identity  of  names,  nor  the 
least  hint  given  as  to  the  cause  of  it,  we  at  once  perceive 
that  it  may  very  naturally  be  referred  to  the  union  which 
is  said  to  have  taken  place  between  the  houses,  and  which 
many  circumstances  tend  to  show,  however  extraordinary 
it  may  seem,  was  a  cordial  union. 


XXVII. 

I  now  proceed  to  consider  some  of  the  public  conse- 
quences of  this  marriage  to  Judah. 

In  the  eighteenth  verse  of  the  eighth  chapter  of  the  second 
Book  of  Kings,  we  are  informed  of  Jehoram's  wickedness, 
and  at  whose  instigation  it  was  wrought. — In  the  twenty- 
second  verse,  we  find  it  said,  (after  some  account  of  a  rebel- 
lion of  the  Edomites)  ':  then  Libnah  revolted  at  the  same 
time.'' — No  cause  is  assigned  for  this  revolt  of  Libnah  ;  the 
few  words  quoted  are  incidentally  introduced,  and  the  sub- 
ject is  dismissed.  But  in  the  Chronicles1  a  cause  is  as- 
signed, though  still  in  a  manner  very  brief  and  inexplicit ; 
'•  the  same  time,  also,"  (so  the  narrative  runs,)  "  did  Libnah 
revolt  from  under  his  hand  ;  because  he  had  forsaken  the 
Lord  God-  of  his  fathers  ;"  that  is,  because,  at  the  per- 
Buasion  of  Athaliah — for  she,  we  have  found,2  was  his 
state-adviser— Jehoram  did  what  Ahab,  his  father-in-law, 
had  done  at  the  persuasion  of  the  mother  of  Athaliah,  set 
up  a  strange  god  in  his  kingdom,  even  Baal.  Thus,  this 
supplementary  clause,  short  as  it  is,  may  serve,  I  think,  as 
a  clue  to  explain  the  revolt  of  Libnah.  For  Libnah,  it 
appears  from  a  passage  in  Joshua,  was  one  of  the  cities  of 
Judah,  given  to  the  priests,  the  sons  of  Aaron  ;3  no  won- 

i  2  Chron.  xxi.  10.  2  2  Kings  viii.  18.         3  Josh.  xv.  42;  xxi.  13. 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  215 

der,  therefore,  that  the  citizens  of  such  a  city  should  be 
the  first  to  reject  with  indignation  the  authority  of  a  mon- 
arch, who  was  even  then  setting  at  nought  the  God  whose 
servants  they  especially  were,  and  who  was  substituting 
for  him  the  abomination  of  the  Zidonians.  This  is  the 
explanation  of  the  revolt  of  Libnah.  Yet,  satisfactory  as 
it  is,  when  we  are  once  fairly  in  possession  of  it,  the  ex- 
planation is  anything  but  obvious.  Libnah,  it  is  said,  re- 
volts, but  that  revolt  is  not  expressly  coupled  with  the  in- 
troduction of  Baal  into  the  country  as  a  god  ;  nor  is  that 
pernicious  novelty  coupled  with  the  marriage  of  Athaliah  ; 
nor  is  any  reason  alleged  why  Libnah  should  feel  pecul- 
iarly alive  to  the  ignominy  and  shame  of  such  an  act ; 
for  where  Libnah  was,  or  what  it  was.  or  whereof  its  in- 
habitants consisted,  are  things  unknown  to  the  readers  of 
Kings  and  Chronicles,  and  would  continue  unknown,  were 
they  not  to  take  advantage  of  a  hint  or  two  in  the  Book 
of  Joshua. 


XXVIII. 

I  am  confirmed  in  the  supposition  that  the  revolt  of 
Libnah  is  correctly  ascribed  to  the  indignation  of  the 
Priests  at  the  worship  of  Baal,  by  other  circumstances  in 
the  history  of  those  times  ;  for  many  things  conspire  to 
show,  on  the  one  side,  the  reckless  idolatry  of  the  royal 
house  of  Judah,  (so  true  to  their  God  till  the  blood  of  the 
house  of  Ahab  began  to  run  in  their  veins,)  and,  on  the 
other  side,  the  general  disaffection  of  the  ministers  of  God, 
and  the  desperate  condition  to  which  they  were  reduced. 
For  when  the  Temple  of  Jerusalem  was  to  be  repaired, 
which  was  done  by  Joash,  the  grandson  of  Athaliah,1  the 

1  2  Chron.  xiiv.  4. 


216 


THE    VERACITY    OF   THE  PART    II. 


effects  of  her  wicked  misrule  incidentally  come  out.  Not 
only  had  the  utensils  of  the  Temple  been  removed  to  the 
house  of  Baal,  but  its  very  walls  had  in  many  places  been 
broken  up,  the  ample  funds  put  into  the  hands  of  the  young 
king  being  principally  devoted,  not  to  decorations,  but  to 
the  purchase  of  substantial  materials,  timber  and  stones ; 
and  from  a  casual  expression  touching  the  rites  of  the 
Temple,  that  "  there  were  offered  burnt-offerings  in  the 
House  of  the  Lord  continually  all  the  days  of  Jehoi- 
ada"1  it  is  pretty  evident  that,  whilst  Athaliah  was  in 
power,  even  these  had  been  discontinued  ;  that  even  Judah, 
the  tribe  of  God's  own  choice,  even  Zion,  the  hill  which 
he  loved,  paid  him  no  longer  any  public  testimony  of  alle- 
giance, the  faithful  city  herself  become  an  harlot.  So 
wanton  was  the  defiance  of  the  most  High  God,  during  the 
reigns  of  Jehoram,  Ahaziah,  and  the  subsequent  usurpa- 
tion of  Athaliah,  when  these  her  husband  and  her  son 
were  dead. 

On  the  other  hand,  Joash,  the  rightful  possessor  of  the 
throne  of  Judah,  an  infant  plucked  from  among  his  slaugh- 
tered kindred  by  an  aunt,  and  saved  from  the  murderous 
hands  of  a  grandmother,  grew  up  unobserved — where,  of 
all  places  ? — in  the  Lord's  House,  contiguous  as  it  was  to 
the  palace  of  Athaliah,  who  little  dreamed  that  she  had 
such  an  enemy  in  such  a  quarter  ;  the  High  Priest  his 
protector ;  the  Priests  and  Levites  his  future  partisans  ;  so 
that  when  events  were  ripe  for  the  overthrow  of  Athaliah, 
the  child  was  set  up  as  the  champion  of  the  Church  of 
God,  so  long  prostrate  before  Baal,  but  still  not  spirit-broken 
— cast  down,  but  not  destroyed  ;  and  by  that  Church,  and 
no  party  else,  was  he  established  ;  and  the  unnatural 
usurper  was  hurled  from  her  polluted  throne,  with  the 

»  2  Chron.  xxiv.  14. 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  217 

shriek  of  treason  upon  her  lips  ;  and  having  lived  like  her  • 
mother,  like  her  mother  she  died,  killed  under  her  own 
walls,  and  among  the  hoofs  of  the  horses.1  This,  I  say,  is 
a  very  consistent  consummation  of  a  resistance,  of  which 
the  revolt  of  Libnah,  some  fourteen  years  Hefore,  was  the 
earnest :  in  the  revolt  of  Libnah,  a  city  of  the  Priests,  the 
disaffection  of  the  Priests  prematurely  breaks  out ;  in  the 
dethronement  of  Athaliah,  achieved  by  the  Priests,  that 
same  disaffection  finds  its  final  issue  ;  the  interval  between 
the  two  events  having  sufficed  to  fill  up  the  iniquity  of 
Baal's  worshippers,  and  to  organize  a  revolt  upon  a  greater 
scale  than  that  of  Libnah,  which  restored  its  dues  to  the 
Church,  and  to  God  his  servants,  his  offerings,  and  his 
house. 

But  will  any  man  say  that  the  sacred  historian  so 
ordered  his  materials,  that  such  incidents  as  these  which  I 
have  named  should  successfully  turn  up — that  he  guarded 
his  hands  in  all  this  wittingly — that  he  let  fall,  with  con- 
summate artifice,  first  a  brief  and  incidental  notice  (a  mere 
parenthesis)  of  the  revolt  of  a  single  town,  suppressing 
meanwhile  all  mention  of  its  peculiar  constitution  and 
character,  though  such  as  prepared  it  above  others  for 
revolt- — that  then,  after  abandoning  not  only  Libnah,  but 
the  subject  of  Judah  in  general,  and  applying  himself  to 
the  affairs  of  Israel  in  their  turn,  he  should  finally  revert 
to  his  former  topic,  or  rather  to  a  kindred  one.  and  lay 
before  us  the  history  of  a  general  revolt,  organized  by  the 
Priests  ;  and  all,  in  the  forlorn  hope  that  the  uniform 
working  of  the  same  principle  of  disaffection  in  the  same 
party,  and  for  the  same  cause,  in  two  detached  instances, 
would  not  pass  unobserved  ;  but  that  such  consistency 
would  be  detected,  and  put  down  to  the  credit  of  the  nar- 

i  2  Kings  xi.  16. 

19 


218  THE    VERACITY   OF    THE  PART    II. 

rative  at  large?  This  surely  is  a  degree  of  refinement 
much  beyond  belief. 

Thus  having  traced  this  singular  people  through  a  long 
and  most  diversified  history,  Ave  are  come  to  see  planted  in 
both  kingdoms  of  Israel  and  Judah  the  idolatrous  principle 
which  was  shortly  to  be  the  downfall  of  both.  God  usu- 
ally works  out  his  own  ends  in  the  way  of  natural  conse- 
quence, even  his  judgments  being  in  general  the  ordinary 
fruits  of  the  offences  which  called  for  them  ;  and  in  this 
instance  the  calves  of  Jeroboam  and  (he  groves  of  Baal 
were  the  sin ;  and  from  the  sin  were  made  to  flow,  as  a 
matter  of  course,  the  disgust  of  all  virtuous  Israelites,  and 
the  intestine  divisions  resulting  from  it;  the  interruption 
or  suspension  of  all  public  worship ;  the  mischiefs  of  a  per- 
petual conflict  between  a  national  code  of  laws  still  in 
force,  and  national  idolatry,  no  less  actually  established 
than  the  laws  ;  the  depravity  of  morals  which  that  idola- 
try encouraged,  and  which  served  to  sap  the  people's 
strength  ;  all,  elements  of  ruin  which  only  wanted  to  be 
developed  in  order  to  be  fatal,  and  which  in  a  very  few 
generations  did  their  work. 

It  is  curious  to  observe  how  the  origin,  the  progress,  and 
the  consummation  of  the  devastating  principle,  correspond 
in  the  two  kingdoms. 

Israel  is  the  first  to  offend,  both  by  the  sin  of  Jeroboam 
and  the  sin  of  Ahab  ;  and  Israel  is  the  first  to  have  illus- 
trious Prophets  sent  to  him  to  counteract  the  evil,  if  it 
were  possible, — whom,  however,  he  persecutes  or  slays; 
and  Israel  is  the  first  to  be  carried  into  captivity. 

Judah.  after  some  years,  follows  the  example  of  his 
rival.  Idolatry,  even  the  worst,  that  of  the  same  Baal,  is 
brought  into  Judah.  Prophets,  many  and  great,  are  now 
in  turn  sent  to  warn  him  of  the  evil  to  come  ;  but  now  he 
too  has  declared  for  the  groves ;    and  those  Prophets  he 


PART    II.  HISTORICAL    SCRIPTURES.  219 

stones,  in  one  instant  even  between  the  porch  and  the 
altar ;  and,  accordingly,  by  nearly  the  same  interval  as 
Judah  followed  Israel  in  his  idolatries,  did  he  follow  him 
in  his  fate,  and  went  after  him  to  sit  down  and  weep  by 
the  waters  of  Babylon.  There  is  something  very  coin- 
cident in  this  relative  scale  of  sin  and  suffering. 

It  was  the  office  of  those  prophets  of  whom  I  spoke,  not 
only  to  foretell  things  to  come,  but  also  to  denounce  the 
sins  of  the  times  in  which  they  lived ;  they  were  censors, 
as  well  as  seers.  Of  the  earlier  race,  Ahijah,  Elijah, 
Elisha,  and  others,  we  have  no  writings  at  all,  otherwise 
they  would  have  doubtless  offered  in  their  province  as 
moralists,  a  mirror  of  their  own  age,  in  their  own  nation 
of  Israel.  Of  the  latter  race,  Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  and  more, 
wc  possess  the  records,  and  in  those  records  not  unfre- 
quently  a  picture  of  the  condition  of  either  kingdom  ;  of 
Judah  more  especially.  Here,  therefore,  a  new  scene 
opens  before  us  ;  a  new,  though  limited  field  of  argument, 
such  as  I  have  been  exploring,  presents  itself.  It  remains 
to  produce  a  few  such  allusions  to  contemporary  transac- 
tions, as  are  blended  with  the  prophecies — to  examine 
how  they  tally  with  facts,  as  we  find  them  set  forth  else- 
where, by  the  sacred  historians  ;  and  thence  to  derive 
vouchers  for  the  veracious  character  of  the  prophets  them- 
selves, such  as  may  promote  a  disposition  to  give  them  at 
least  a  favorable  hearing. 


THE   VERACITY 


OF    THE 


PROPHETICAL    SCRIPTURES. 


PART  III. 

Thus  far  I  have  been  applying  the  test  of  coincidence 
without  design  to  the  historical  Scriptures,  I  will  now  do 
the  same  by  some  of  the  prophetical,  founding  the  argu- 
ment on  a  comparison  of  these  latter  writings  with  those 
details  relating  to  the  period  in  which  the  Prophet  is  said  to 
have  lived,  given  in  the  concluding  chapters  of  the  books 
of  Kings  and  Chronicles.  It  is  possible  that  these  coin- 
cidences may  be  thought  proportionally  fewer  in  number 
than  those  which  other  parts  of  Scripture  have  been  found 
to  supply ;  but  it  must  be  remembered,  that  the  books  of 
the  Prophets  are  not  of  any  great  bulk,  and  that  the  chap- 
ters in  the  books  of  Kings  and  Chronicles  which  furnish 
materials  for  checking  them,  are  neither  long  nor  many. 
Moreover,  which  is  the  chief  consideration,  that  the  lan- 
guage of  Prophecy,  as  might  be  expected,  is  commonly 
framed  in  terms  so  general,  and  often  so  dark  and  figura- 
tive, that  it  is  easy  to  overlook  a  latent  allusion  to  an  event 
of  the  day  which  it  may  really  contain,  even  where  some 
notice  of  that  event  does  happen  also  to  be  left  on  record 


PART    III.       THE    PROPHETICAL    SCRIPTURES.  221 

in  the  contemporary  history.     With  regard  to  such  coin- 
cidences as  we  do  find,  it  may  be  observed, 

1.  First,  that  the  argument  they  furnish  has  a  twofold 
value ;  since  it  not  only  demonstrates  the  Historian  and 
the  Prophet  to  be  veracious,  the  one,  in  the  narrative  of 
facts,  the  other,  in  such  allusions  to  them  as  blend  with 
passages  more  strictly  prophetical ;  but  that  it  also  serves 
to  determine  the  date  of  the  Prophet  himself;  a  date, 
which  when  once  obtained,  fixes  many  other  events  of 
which  he  clearly  seems  to  tell,  far  in  futurity  with  respect 
to  him,  and  so  ministers  to  our  conviction  that  it  could  not 
be  of  human  knowledge  that  he  spoke.  We  indeed,  on 
whom  the  ends  of  the  world  are  come,  may  be  supposed  to 
stand  less  in  need  of  such  a  confirmation  of  our  faith  in 
the  Prophets  ;  for  since  the  objects  of  their  prophecy  are 
two  ;  the  more  immediate  events  which  were  coming  upon 
several  kingdoms  of  the  world,  and  especially  those  of 
Israel  and  Judah  ;  and  the  more  distant  Advent  of  the 
Messiah  ;  the  evidence  for  the  genuineness  of  their  claim 
to  the  prophetical  character  arising  out  of  this  latter  pro- 
vince, where  they  appear  as  heralds  of  the  Gospel,  is  strong 
to  us,  because  we  do  see  the  actual  circumstances  of  Jesus 
Christ  and  his  coming,  correspond  in  so  express  a  manner 
with  the  sketch  made  of  them,  by  Isaiah,  for  example,  (as 
nobody  in  this  instance  can  dispute,)  so  many  hundred 
years  before.  But  their  contemporaries,  or  the  generations 
who  lived  next  to  them  (and  these  were  the  persons  who 
admitted  their  writings  into  the  prophetical  canon,)  were 
cut  off  from  this  ground  of  confidence  in  their  message  ; 
they  must  have  rested  their  belief  in  them  upon  the  ac- 
complishment of  their  political  prophecies  alone,  such 
being  the  only  ones  of  which  they  lived  to  see  the  com- 
pletion. Although  therefore  the  mere  fact  of  the  Jews 
having  of  old  agreed  to  acknowledge  them  as  Prophets,  is 

19* 


222  THE    VERACITY   OF    THE  PART    III. 

enough  to  show  that  such  evidence  alone  sufficed  for  them, 
they  being  the  best  judges  of  what  was  sufficient ;  still  if 
we  have  the  means  of  convincing  ourselves  that  these  re- 
markably exact  prophecies,  (claiming  at  least  so  to  be,) 
which  related  to  the  Assyrian  invasions,  the  captivity,  and 
the  like,  were  certainly  delivered  long  before  the  events 
arose,  we  shall  have  a  further  reason,  over  and  above  an 
experience  of  the  fulfilment  of  those  concerning  the  Mes- 
siah, for  putting  our  trust  in  them,  and  considering  them 
Prophets  indeed. 

2.  Nor  is  this  all.  For  Secondly,  it  may  be  observed, 
that  the  effect  of  this  evidence  from  coincidence  without 
design  is  to  show,  that  the  prophet  sometimes  occupied  a 
considerable  range  of  years  in  the  delivering  of  his  predic- 
tions— thus,  that  the  whole  Book  of  Isaiah,  was  not  struck 
off  at  a  heat,  was  no  extempore  effusion,  but  a  collection 
of  many  distinct  predictions  (claiming  to  be  such)  uttered 
from  time  to  time,  as  events,  or  the  heart,  hot  within  the 
prophet,  prompted  them  ;  that  it  was  in  truth,  as  the  title 
describes  it,  "  the  vision  which  he  saw  concerning  Judah 
and  Jerusalem,  in  the  days  of  Uzziah,  Jotham,  Ahaz 
and  Hezekiah,  kings  of  Judah."  Now  this  is  an  impor- 
tant consideration,  because  it  argues  that  the  prophet  did 
not  deliver  himself  of  some  happy  oracle  for  the  once,  and 
earn  the  reputation  of  a  seer  by  an  accident,  but  maintain- 
ed that  character  through  a  life — a  circumstance  which 
goes  very  far  in  itself  to  exclude  the  possibility  of  impos- 
ture, nothing  being  so  fatal  to  fraud  of  this  kind  as  time. 

Having  made  these  preliminary  remarks,  I  shall  now 
address  myself  to  the  argument  itself. 


PART    III.  PROPHETICAL    SCRIPTURES.  223 


In  the  seventh  chapter  of  Isaiah  we  read  that  Ahaz  king 
of  Judah  was  threatened  with  invasion  by  the  confederate 
armies  of  Syria  and  Israel :  and  that  Isaiah  the  prophet 
was  commissioned  by  God  to  foretell  to  Ahaz  the  result  of 
this  invasion  ;  and  not  only  so,  but  the  disastrous  end  of 
one  of  those  kingdoms,  if  not  both  of  them,  after  a  period 
of  threescore  and  five  years.  And  the  charge  is  thus  given 
to  Isaiah  :  "  Go  forth  now  to  meet  Ahaz,  thou  and  Shear- 
jashub  thy  son,  at  the  end  of  the  conduit  of  the  tipper 
pool,  in  the  highway  of  the  fuller's  field,"  (v.  3).  Here 
was  to  be  the  scene  of  the  prophecy  ;  and,  accordingly, 
here  it  professes  to  have  been  actually  spoken.  To  this 
point  I  would  draw  the  attention  of  my  readers  because 
the  incidental  mention  of  the  place  where  it  was  to  be  de- 
livered, furnishes  us  with  the  means  of  showing  with  great 
probability  that  a  prophecy  it  was.  For,  why  at  the  end 
of  the  conduit  of  the  upper  pool?  No  reason  whatever  is 
assigned,  or  even  hinted  for  the  choice  of  this  particular 
spot,  rather  than  the  palace  of  Ahaz,  or  the  city-gate. 
But  on  turning  to  the  thirty-second  chapter  of  the  second 
Book  of  Chronicles,  in  which  are  described  the  preparations 
made  by  king  Hezekiah  some  thirty  years  afterwards, 
against  a  similar  invasion  of  Jerusalem  by  Sennacherib 
and  the  Assyrians,  I  find  this  to  be  amongst  the  number, 
that  ''he  took  counsel  with  his  princes  and  his  mighty 
men  to  stop  the  waters  of  the  fountains  which  were  with- 
out the  city  ;  and  they  did  help  him.  So  there  was  gath- 
ered much  people  who  stopped  all  the  fountains,  and  the 
brook  that  ran  through  the  midst  of  the  land,  saying, 
\\  hy  should  the  kings  of  Assyria  come,  and  find  much 
water  V'1 

»  2  Chron.  xxxii.  3—5. 


224  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    III. 

Here  then  in  this  passage  of  Hezekiah's  history,  have  we 
the  key  to  the  passage  in  the  history  of  Ahaz,  which  is 
now  engaging  our  inquiry,  and  in  which  the  prophecy  of 
Isaiah  is  involved.  "  Isaiah  was  to  go  forth  to  meet  Ahaz, 
at  the  end  of  the  conduit  of  the  upper  pool ;"  to  go  forth — 
the  conduit  of  the  upper  pool,  therefore,  was  without  the 
walls,  open  to  the  use  of  the  enemy.  Ahaz,  therefore,  we 
may  conjecture,  was  employed,  as  we  know,  though  not 
from  Isaiah,  Hezekiah  under  similar  circumstances  after- 
wards was  employed,  with  a  number  of  his  people  in  pro- 
viding a  defence  for  the  city  by  stopping  the  fountains,  of 
which  the  enemy  might  get  possession.  The  place,  there- 
fore, was  appropriate  to  the  subject  of  the  message  with 
which  Isaiah  was  charged,  namely,  that  their  labors  were 
needless,  for  that  God  would  take  care  of  their  city  ;  and  it 
was  convenient  for  the  publication  of  it,  because  the  work 
interested  and  occupied  both  the  sovereign  and  the  people, 
and  consequently  a  multitude  were  there  gathered  together, 
ready  to  hear  it.  Now  it  appears  to  me,  that  this  casual 
mention  of  Ahaz,  being  for  some  reason  or  other  to  be  found 
by  the  prophet  at  the  conduit  of  the  upper  pool,  to  which 
he  was  to  go  forth,  without  one  word  of  note  or  explana- 
tion why  he  should  be  found  there,  or  what  was  its  exact 
site,  or  why  it  should  be  a  fit  place  for  delivering  the  mes- 
sage, coupled  with  the  satisfactory  cause  for  his  being  there, 
which  by  the  merest  chance  we  are  enabled  of  ourselves  to 
supply  from  another  quarter,  does  establish  it  as  a  fact,  that 
Ahaz  was  occupied  with  concerting  measures  of  defence 
for  the  city  when  Isaiah  hailed  him.  But  if  so,  Isaiah's 
message  must  have  necessarily  been  delivered  when  the 
invasion  was  only  threatened,  when  there  was  yet  time  for 
making  provision  to  meet  it,  and  when  the  result  of  it,  of 
which  he  speaks,  must  have  been  as  yet  in  futurity  ;  whilst 
events  still  beyond  it,  to  which  his  words  extend  to,  must 


PART    III.  PROPHETICAL    SCRIPTURES.  225 

have  been  in  a  futurity  yet  more  distant ;  i.  e.  Isaiah  must 
have  been  a  prophet.  Certainly  it  is  a  small  matter  of 
fact  which  lays  the  foundation  for  a  great  conclusion :  but 
its  seeming  insignificance  is  just  that  which  gives  it  extra- 
ordinary value  for  the  purpose  for  which  I  use  it ;  since  it 
is  impossible  to  believe  that  a  forger  of  pretended  prophe- 
cies, written  after  the  event,  would  have  hit  upon  such  an 
expedient  for  stamping  his  imposture  with  a  mark  of  truth, 
as  to  make  the  scene  of  this  prediction  a  conduit  outside  the 
walls,  without  adding  the  most  remote  hint  about  the  in- 
ference he  meant  to  be  drawn  from  it. 


II. 


There  is  another  coincidence,  or  at  least  a  probable 
coincidence,  between  a  passage  in^  Isaiah  (viii.  2),  and 
other  passages  in  the  Books  of  Kings,  (2  Kings  xvi.  10, 
xviii.  2,)  and  Chronicles,  (2  Chron.  xxix.  1,)  which  goes  to 
determine  that  the  prophet  was  contemporary  with  Ahaz  ; 
thus  identifying  the  age  of  Isaiah  and  the  date  of  his  pro- 
phesying, with  a  period  a  hundred  and  forty  years  before 
the  Babylonish  captivity,  of  which  event  nevertheless  he  is 
full  to  overflow ring.  The  following  is  the  coincidence  I 
suppose. 

It  appears  to  have  been  an  object  with  this  prophet,  to 
warn  Judah  from  depending  upon  Assyria  for  help  against 
Syria  and  Israel — He  saw  by  the  spirit  more  to  apprehend 
in  the  ally  than  in  the  adversary  ;  (opposed  as  this  opinion 
was  to  the  judgment  of  a  generation  who  did  not  allow  for 
the  ambition  of  Assyria,  and  especially  of  Assyria  when 
absorbed  in  the  Babylonish  empire,1  in  its  present  profes- 

1  See  Lightfoot,  Vol.  I.  p.  114,  fol. 


226  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    III. 

sion  of  amity  ;  nor  the  approaching  downfall  of  Syria  and 
Israel,  in  their  actual  strength.)  However,  to  impress  this, 
his  prophetical  view  of  things  upon  Ahaz  the  more  effect- 
ually, (the  policy  of  that  monarch  having  been  to  court 
Assyria,1)  he  takes  his  pen,  and  writes  in  a  great  roll,  again 
and  again,  after  the  manner  of  his  age  and  nation,  when 
symbolical  teaching  prevailed,  one  word  of  woe,  Maher- 
shalal-hash-baz — "  hasting  to  the  spoil  he  hasteth  to  the 
prey" — which,  being  interpreted,  spake  of  Assyria,  that  so  it 
should  come  to  pass  touching  the  havoc  about  to  be  wrought 
by  Assyria;  first,  on  the  kingdoms  of  Syria  and  Israel; 
and  eventually,  when  merged  in  the  Chaldean  kingdom,  on 
Judah  itself.  And  to  render  this  act  more  emphatic,  or  to 
impress  it  the  more  memorably  on  the  king,  he  calls  in  two 
witnesses,  Uriah  the  priest,  and  Zechariah  the  son  of  Jeb- 
erechiah,  (Isai.  viii.  2.2) 

Now  who  are  they  ?  Names,  it  may  be  said,  of  unknown 
individuals  perhaps  ;  nay  possibly  mere  names  ;  the  whole 
being  a  figure,  and  not  a  fact.  Yet  I  discern,  on  turning 
to  the  sixteenth  chapter  of  the  second  Book  of  Kings,  that 
one  Uriah,  he  also  a  priest,  was  a  person  with  whom  king 
Ahaz  was  in  close  communication,  using  him  as  a  tool  for 
his  own  unlawful  innovations  in  the  worship  of  his  coun- 
try ;  "  when  he  introduced  into  the  Temple  the  fashion  of 
the  altar  which  he  had  seen  at  Damascus  ;'?  in  all  which, 
we  are  told,  "  Uriah  the  priest  did  according  to  all  that 
king  Ahaz  commanded,"  (v.  16.)  If  therefore  this  was  the 
same  Uriah  (for  the  coincidence  turns  on  that)  we  have  one 
witness  taken  from  the  confidential  servants  of  the  king. 
And  with  respect  to  Zechariah,  the  oilier  witness,  I  learn 
from  the  eighteenth  chapter  of  the  same  Book  of  Kings, 
that  twenty  and  five  years  old  was  llezekiah  when  he  be- 

»  2  Chron.  xxviii.  16.  a  Lightfoot,  Vol.  i.  p.  101. 


PART    III.  PROPHETICAL    SCR1 P Tl .).!■:».  227 

gan  to  reign,  and  that  "  he  reigned  twenty  and  nine  years 
in  Jerusalem,"  and  that  "  his  mother's  name  was  Abi," 
the  daughter  of  Zechariah,  (ver.  2.)  It  should  seem  there- 
fore that  Ahaz,  who  was  father  of  Ilezekiah,  was  son-in- 
law  of  one  Zechariah  ;  if  therefore  this  was  the  same  Zech- 
ariah— for  the  coincidence  again  turns  on  that — we  have  a 
second  witness  taken  from  amongst  the  immediate  con- 
nections of  the  king;  and  it  may  be  added,  that  the  prob- 
ability of  these  parties  mentioned  in  Isaiah  being  the  same 
as  those  of  the  same  names  mentioned  in  the  Book  of 
Kings,  is  increased  by  their  being  two  in  number :  had 
Uriah  alone  been  spoken  of  in  Isaiah,  or  Zechariah  alone, 
and  a  single  person  of  the  same  name  been  met  with  in 
the  Book  of  Kings,  as  about  the  person  of  Ahaz,  the  iden- 
tity of  the  two  might  have  admitted  of  more  dispute  than 
when  Uriah  and  Zechariah  are  both  produced  by  the  pro- 
phet, and  are  both  found  in  the  history.  If  the  names  had 
been  twenty  instead  of  two,  and  all  had  been  found  to 
agree,  no  doubt  whatever  of  the  identity  could  have  been 
entertained. 

Here,  then,  we  can  account  for  the  choice  of  Isaiah,  who 
wished  the  transaction  in  which  he  was  engaged  to  be  en- 
forced upon  the  attention  of  Ahaz  with  all  the  advantages 
he  could  command,  and  so  selected  two  of  the  king's  bo- 
som friends  to  testify  concerning  it. 

This,  I  say,  induces  the  belief  that  the  prophet  really 
was  contemporary  with  Ahaz;  for  how  can  we  suppose. 
that  if  his  pretended  prophecy  had  been  a  forgery  of  after 
times,  so  happy,  because  so  trivial  an  evidence  of  its  genu- 
ineness, should  have  been  introduced,  and  the  names  of  his 
witnesses  have  been  selected,  according  so  singularly  with 
those  of  two  men  certainly  about  the  person  of  Ahaz  whilst 
he  lived  ?  And  bow  difficult  it  is  to  imagine  that  a  forger, 
even  admitting  that  he  adopted  those  names  by  a  fortu- 


228  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    III. 

nate  or  astute  device,  should  have  stopped  where  he  did, 
and  not  have  taken  care  to  make  it  clear  that  by  them  he 
meant  the  Uriah  who  was  the  priest  of  Ahaz,  and  the 
Zechariah  who  was  his  relation,  instead  of  leaving  the 
matter  (as  it  is  left)  open  to  dispute.1 


III. 

The  next  coincidence  which  I  shall  lay  before  you  is 
one  which,  tends  to  establish  two  facts  of  the  utmost  im- 
portance ;  the  one,  that  the  Assyrian  army  under  Sen- 
nacherib perished  in  some  remarkable  manner  ;  the  other, 
(hat  the  Babylonish  Captivity  was  distinctly  foretold,  when 
Babylon  was  as  yet  no  object  of  fear  to  Jerusalem. 

With  respect  to  the  first,  indeed,  the  sudden  destruction 
of  the  Assyrian  host,  it  was  to  be  expected  that  if  such  a 
catastrophe  did  occur,  it  would  be  an  epoch  in  the  times  ; 
an  event  that  would  fill  the  whole  East  with  its  strange- 
ness :  and  accordingly,  the  allusions  to  it,  direct  and  in 
direct,  which  are  to  be  met  with  in  the  writings  of  Isaiah, 
are  very  many.  His  mind  seems  much  possessed  by  it ; 
and  this  is  indeed  an  argument  for  the  truth  of  the  fact, 
not  feeble  in  itself — but  the  one  I  have  to  propose  to  you 
is  more  definite  and  precise. 

In  the  thirty-ninth  chapter  of  Isaiah  I  read  as  follows  : 

1  At  that  time  Merodach-baladan,  the  son  of  Baladan, 
king  of  Babylon,  sent  letters  and  a  present  to  Hezekiah  ; 
for  lie  had  heard  that  he  had  been  sick,  and  was  recovered. 

And  Hezekiah  was  glad  of  them,  and  showed  them  the 

>  It  is  scarcely  necessary  to  remark  that  Uriah  (Isaiah  viii.  2)  and  Uri- 
jah  (2  Kings  xvi.  16)  are  the  same  word  in  the  Hehrew. — Dr.  Lightfoot 
takes  for  granted  that  the  parties  named  in  Isaiah  and  in  Kings  are  the 
same.  Vol.  !.  p.  101,  fol. 


PART    III.  PROPHETICAL    SCRIPTURES.  229 

house  of  his  precious  things,  the  silver,  -and  the  gold,  and 
the  spices,  and  the  precious  ointment,  and  all  the  house  of 
his  armor,  and  all  that  was  found  in  his  treasures ;  there 
was  nothing  in  his  house,  nor  in  all  his  dominion,  that 
Hezekiah  showed  them  not.  Then  came  Isaiah  the 
prophet  to  king  Hezekiah,  and  said  unto  him,  What  said 
these  men  ?  and  from  whence  came  they  unto  thee?  And 
Hezekiah  said,  They  are  come  from  a.  far  country  unto 
me,  even  from  Babylon.  Then  said  he,  What  have  they 
seen  in  thy  house  ?  And  Hezekiah  answered,  All  that  is 
in  mine  house  have  they  seen  ;  there  is  nothing  among 
my  treasures  that  I  have  not  showed  them.  Then  said 
Isaiah  to  Hezekiah,  Hear  the  word  of  the  Lord  of  hosts  : 
Behold,  the  days  come,  that  all  that  is  in  thine  house,  and 
that  which  thy  fathers  have  laid  up  in  store  until  this  day, 
shall  be  carried  to  Babylon  :  nothing  shall  be  left,  saith 
the  Lord.  And  of  thy  sons  that  shall  issue  from  thee, 
which  thou  shalt  beget,  shall  they  take  away  ;  and  they 
shall  be  eunuchs  in  the  palace  of  the  king  of  Babylon/' 

1.  Now  the  first  thing  1  would  observe  is  this— that  the 
embassy  from  the  king  of  Babylon  to  Hezekiah  was  to 
congratulate  him  on  his  recovery  from  his  sickness  :  which 
sickness  must  have  befallen  him  in  the  year  of  Sennach- 
erib's invasion,  and  immediately  previous  to  it — in  that 
year,  because  he  is  said  to  have  reigned  twenty  and  nine 
years  ;'  and  the  invasion  of  Judah  is  said2  to  have  occurred 
in  the  fourteenth  year  of  his  reign  ;  leaving  him  still  fifteen 
years  to  reign,  which  was  precisely  the  period  by  which 
his  life  was  prolonged  beyond  his  sickness  ; — immediately 
/>n  vious  to  that  invasion,  because  the  prophet,  in  the 
same  breath  that  he  assures  him  from  God  of  his  recovery, 
assures  him  also  that  God  would  deliver  the  city  out  of  the 

1  2  Kings  xviii.  2.  2  lb.  xviii.  13. 

20 


230  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    III. 

hand  of  the  king  of  Assyria,  and  would  defend  the  city 
(Is.  xxxviii.  6,)  as  though  the  danger  was  imminent.' 
The  recovery  therefore  of  Hezekiah,  and  the  destruction 
of  the  Assyrians,  were  events  close  upon  one  another  in 
point  of  time.  And  after  a  short  interval,  allowing  for  the 
news  of  Hezekiah's  recovery  to  reach  Babylon,  and  an 
embassy  to  be  prepared,  that  embassy  of  congratulation 
was  dispatched :  or  in  other  words,  the  embassy  from 
Babylon  must  have  been  close  upon  the  destruction  of  the 
Assyrian  army. 

Now  we  are  told,  that  upon  the  eve  of  the  invasion  of 
Jerusalem  itself,  and  whilst  Sennacherib  was  already  in 
the  country  taking  the  fenced  cities  of  Judah  before  him,2 
Hezekiah  in  his  alarm  endeavored  to  buy  off  the  king  of 
Assyria  :  ';  That  which  thou  puttest  on  me,"  said  he, 
"will  I  bear" — "And  the  king  of  Assyria  appointed  unto 
Hezekiah  three  hundred  talents  of  silver,  and  thirty  talents 
of  gold,"— a  sum  which  completely  exhausted  the  means 
of  Hezekiah  ;  insomuch  that  after  he  had  given  him  all 
the  silver  that  was  found  in  the  house  of  the  Lord,  and  in 
the  treasures  of  the  king's  house,  he  was  reduced  to  the 
necessity  of  actually  cutting  off  the  gold  from  the  doors  of 
the  temple,  and  from  the  pillars  which  he  had  overlaid,  to 
give  to  (he  king  of  Assyria.  Nothing  therefore  could  be 
more  complete  than  the  exhaustion  of  his  resources, 
whether  those  of  the  palace  or  of  the  temple,  immediately 
before  the  advance  of  Sennacherib's  army  on  the  capital — 
for  in  spite  of  this  cowardly  sacrifice  on  the  part  of  the 
Jews,  the  Assyrians  broke  faith  with  them,  and  marched 
on  Jerusalem. 

But  from  the   passage  in  Isaiah,  (ch.  xxxix.,)  which  I 

1  This  clearly  fixes  the  order  of  the  two  events;  and  shows  that  in  2 
Chron.  xxxii.  21—24,  the  order  is  not  observed. 

2  2  Kings  xviii.  13,  14. 


PART    III.  PROPHETICAL    SCRIPTURES.  231 

have  extracted,  where  the  embassy  from  Babylon  is  men- 
tioned, and  the  date  of  which  has  been  already  fixed,  (to 
the  utmost  probability  at  least,)  we  gather  that  Hezekiah 
was  then  in  possession  of  a  treasury  singularly  affluent  ; 
so  much  so  indeed  as  to  lead  him  to  make  a  vainglorious 
display  of  his  vast  magazines  to  these  strangers — '-he  was 
glad  of  them,  and  showed  them  the  house  of  his  precious 
things,  the  silver,  and  the  gold,  and  the  spices,  and  the 
precious  ointments,  and  all  the  house  of  his  armor,  and  all 
that  was  found  in  his  treasures  :  there  was  nothing  in  his 
house,  nor  in  all  his  dominion,  that  he  showed  them  not."1 
Here  there  seems  a  strange  and  anaccountable  contra- 
diction to  the  penury  he  had  exhibited  so  shortly  before. 
A  very  brief  interval  had  elapsed  (as  we  have  proved) 
since  he  had  scraped  the  gilding  from  the  very  doors  and 
pillars  to  make  up  a  sum  to  purchase  the  forbearance  of 
the  enemy ;  and  now  his  store  is  become  so  ample  as  to 
betray  him  into  the  vanity  of  exposing  it  before  the  eyes 
of  these  suspicious  strangers.  There  is  no  attempt  made 
to  account  for  the  discrepancy.  A  passage,  however,  of  a 
very  few  lines,  and  very  incindentally  dropping  out  in 
the  thirty-second  chapter  of  the  second  Book  of  Chron- 
icles, (v.  23,  24,)  and  nowhere  else,  supplies  the  explanation 
of  this  extraordinary  and  sudden  mutation.  There,  after 
a  short  account  of  the  discomfiture  of  the  Assyrians  by  the 
angel,  it  is  added,  "  Thus  the  Lord  saved  Hezekiah  and 
the  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem  from  the  hand  of  Sennach- 
erib the  king  of  Assyria,  and  from  the  hand  of  all  other, 
and  guided  them  on  every  side.  And  many  brought  gifts 
unto  the  Lord  to  Jerusalem,  and  presents  to  Hezekiah 
king  of  Judah ;  so  that  he  was  magnified  in  the  sight 
of  all  nations  from  thenceforth." 

i  Isaiah  xxxix.  2. 


232  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PARI    III. 

This  fact  clears  up  at  once  the  apparent  contradiction, 
though  certainly  introduced  for  no  such  purpose  ;  no  man 
can  imagine  it ;  indeed,  the  order  of  these  several  events  is 
confounded  in  this  chapter  of  Chronicles,  and  their  mutual 
dependence  (on  which  my  argument  rests)  deranged  ;  so 
free  from  all  suspicion  of  contrivance  is  this  combination 
of  incidents  in  the  narrative. 

For  only  let  us  recapitulate  the  several  particulars  of  the 
argument.  From  a  passage  in  the  second  Book  of  Kings, 
(xviii.  13,  14,)  I  learn  that  Hezekiah  spent  his  resources  to 
the  very  last  to  bribe  the  Assyrian  to  forbearance  ;  but,  as 
it  proved,  in  vain. 

By  a  comparison  of  a  passage  in  2  Kings  (xviii.  13,  14) 
with  another  in  Isaiah  (zxxviii.  1 — 6),  I  learn  that  the  sick- 
ness of  Hezekiah  was  immediately  before  the  invasion  of 
Jerusalem  by  the  Assyrians. 

By  another  passage  in  Isaiah,  (xxxix.  1,)  I  learn  that  an 
embassage  of  congratulation  was  sent  to  Hezekiah  from 
Babylon,  on  his  recovery  from  his  sickness.  By  the  same, 
that  these  ambassadors  found  him  then  in  possession  of  a 
treasury  full  to  overflowing. 

I  am  at  a  loss  to  account  for  this,  nor  does  the  Scripture 
take  any  pains  to  do  it  for  me  ;  but  I  find,  incidentally,  a 
passage  in  the  second  Book  of  Chronicles,  which  says 
(xxxii.  21,  21)  that  many  had  brought  gifts  to  the  Lord 
at  Jerusalem,  and-  presents  to  Hezekiah ;  so  that  he  was 
thenceforth  magnified  in  the  sight  of  all  nations. 

This  explains  the  change  of  circumstances  I  had  ob- 
served for  mysdf.  The  several  particulars,  therefore,  of 
the  history,  gleaned  from  this  quarter  and  that,  perfectly 
cohere;  arc  evidently  component  parts  of  one  trustworthy 
narrative ;  and  no  reasonable  doubt  will  remain  upon  our 
minds,  that  Hezekiah  was  greatly  straitened  before  the  in- 


PART    III.  PROPHETIC    SCRIPTURES.  233 

vasion,  and  was  suddenly  replenished  after  it ;  but  then 
the  truth  of  these  facts  bears  upon  the  truth  of  the  won- 
derful event  which  is  said  to  have  accompanied  and  ter- 
minated that  invasion  ;  not  indeed  proving1  the  truth  of  it, 
but  very  remarkably  agreeing  with  the  supposition  of  its 
truth.  For  certainly  this  extraordinary  and  voluntary  in- 
flux of  gifts  to  Jerusalem  from  the  nations  round  about, 
sinking  as  Judah  had  long  been  in  its  position  amongst 
those  nations,  indicates  some  strong  re-action  or  other  in 
its  favor  at  that  time ;  as  indeed  does  this  embassage  from 
afar  country,  (such  is  the  description  of  it,)  o.  country  then 
comparatively  but  little  known.  The  dignity  of  Israel 
seems  to  have  once  more  asserted  itself;  and  though  it  is 
not  to  be  affirmed  as  a  positive  fact,  (at  least  on  the  author- 
ity of  the  Book  of  Kings  or  of  Isaiah,  though  the  Book  of 
Chronicles,  howbeit,  in  other  parts  of  this  transaction  so 
defective,  does  seem  to  imply  it),  that  the  miraculous  de- 
struction of  the  Assyrian  army  was  the  event  which  had 
caused  this  strong  sensation  in  the  countries  round  about ; 
yet  such  an  event,  to  say  the  least,  is  very  consistent  with 
it;  and  accordingly,  the  passage  of  Chronicles  to  which  I 
refer,  (xxxii.  23,)  tells  us,  that  '■'  many  brought  gifts  to  the 
Lord  at  Jerusalem,"  as  well  as  "  presents  to  Hezekiah,"  in 
testimony,  it  may  be  presumed,  of  the  work  being  the  Lord's 
doing,  and  not  the  act  of  man  ;  i.  e.  that  the  Assyrian  host 
fell  by  an  infliction  from  heaven,  and  not  by  any  ordinary 
defeat ;  and  if  it  should  suggest  itself,  that  a  part  of  these 
treasures  might  have  been  derived  from  the  spoils  of  the 
Assyrian  host,  and  that  the  amount  of  gifts  from  the  sur- 
rounding nations  might  have  been  augmented  by  the  sack- 
ing of  the  tents  of  the  enemy  ;  even  as  "  all  the  way  was 
full  of  garments  and  vessels"  (we  are  told  on  another  oc- 
casion of  the  sudden  overthrow  of  an  army  of  a  different 

20* 


234  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    III. 

nation),  "  which  the  Syrians  had  cast  away  in  their  haste ;"' 
the  argument  remains  still  the  same. 

2.  Neither  is  this  all.  Hitherto,  we  have  merely  de- 
rived from  the  coincidence  an  argument  for  the  truth  of  the 
miracle. 

But  it  also  confirms  the  prophecy  touching  the  captivity 
to  Babylon ;  and  shows  the  words  to  have  been  spoken 
very  long  before  the  event. 

For  the  aptness  with  which  the  several  independent 
particulars  we  have  collected  fit  into  one  another,  when 
brought  into  juxtaposition,  without  being  packed  for  the 
purpose;  viz.,  the  threat  of  the  Assyrian  invasion;  the 
impoverishment  of  the  exchequer  of  Hezekiah  to  avert  it ; 
the  overthrow  of  the  Assyrian  host;  the  influx  of  treasure 
to  Jerusalem  from  foreign  nations,  or  from  the  enemy's 
camp  ;  the  recovery  of  Hezekiah  ;  the  arrival  of  the  em- 
bassage of  congratulation  from  Babylon  ;  the  wealth  he 
now  exhibits  to  that  embassage,  even  to  ostentation  ; — the 
karmony,  I  say,  with  which  these  several  incidents  concur, 
both  in  details  and  dates,  is  such  as  could  only  result  from 
the  truth  of  the  whole  and  of  its  parts.  If  we  take,  there- 
fore, this  fact  as  a  basis,  as  a  fact  established,  for  so  I  re- 
gard it,  that  at  that  time  Merodach-baladan,  the  son  of  Ba- 
ladan,  sent  letters  and  a  present  to  Hezekiah  ;  for  he  had 
heard  that  he  had  been  sick  and  was  recovered  ;  and  that 
Hezekiah  showed  the  messengers  all  that  was  found  in  his 
treasures,  &c.  the  warning  of  Isaiah,  to  which  Hezekiah's 
vanity  gives  occasion,  rises  so  naturally  out  of  the  premises, 
is  so  entirely  founded  upon  them,  and  so  intimately  com 
bined  with  them,  that  it  is  next  to  impossible  not  to  accept 
it  as  a  fact  too.  The  folly  of  the  king,  and  the  reproof  of 
the  prophet,  must  stand  or  fall  together :  the  one  prompts 

i   2  Kings  vii.  16. 


PART    III.  PROPHETICAL    SCRIPTURES.  235 

the  other;  the  truth  of  the  one  sustains  the  truth  of  the 
other ;  the  date  of  the  one  fixes  the  date  of  the  other.  But 
this-warning,  this  reproof  of  Isaiah,  and  this  confession  of 
the  king,  runs  thus :--What  said  these  men?  and  from 
whence  came  they  unto  thee  P  To  which  Hezekiah 
made  answer,  «  They  are  come  from  a  far  country  unto 
me,  even  from  Babylon."  Then  said  Isaiah,  «  What  June 
they  seen  in  thine  house?"  And  Hezekiah  answered, 
"  All  that  is  in  mine  house  have  they  seen  :  there  is  noth- 
ing among  my  treasures  that  I  have  not  showed  them  " 
Then  said  Isaiah  to  Hezekiah,  «  Hear  the  word  of  the  Lord 
of  hosts:  Behold,  the  days  come,  that  all  that  is  in  thine 
house,  and  that  which  thy  fathers  have  laid  up  in  store 
imtil  tins  day,  shall  be  carried  to  Babylon,  and  nothing 
shall  be  left,  saith  the  Lord."1 

Thus  the  period  of  Hezekiah's  display  of  his  finances 
being  determined  to  a  period  soon  after  the  downfall  of  the 
Assyrians,  this  rebuke  of  the  prophet  which  springs  out  of 
it  is  determined  to  the  same.     Then  the  rebuke  was  a 
prophecy  ;  for  as  yet  it  remained  for  Esar-haddon,  the  son 
of  Sennacherib,  to  annex  Babylon  to  Assyria  by  conquest 
-it  remained  for  the  two  kingdoms  lo  continue  united  for 
two  generations  more-it  remained  for  Nabopolassar,  the 
satrap  of  Babylon,  to  revolt  from  Assyria,  and  set  up  (hut 
kingdom  for  itself-and  it  remained  for  Nebuchadnezzar 
bis  son  to  succeed  him,  and  by  carrying  away  the  Jews  to 
Babylon,  accomplish  the  words  of  Isaiah.     But  this  inter- 
val occupied  a  hundred  years  and  upwards  :   and  so  far 
therefore,  must  the  spirit  of  prophecy  have  carried  him  for- 
ward into  futurity:  and  that  too,  contrary  to  all  present 
appearances  ;  for  Babylon  was  as  yet  but  a  name  to  the 
people  of  Jerusalem— it  was  a  far  country,  and  was  to  be 


1  Isaiah,  xnix. 


236  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    III. 

swallowed  up  in  the  great  Assyrian  empire,  and  recover 
its  independence  once  more,  before  it  could  be  brought  to 
act  against  Judah. 

The  only  objection  to  this  argument  which  I  can  im- 
agine is,  that  the  prophetical  part  of  the  passage  might 
have  been  grafted  upon  the  historical  part  by  a  later  hand  ; 
but  the  seaming,  I  think,  must  in  that  case  have  appeared. 
Whereas  the  prophecy  is  in  the  form  of  a  rebuke ;  the  re- 
buke inseparably  connected  with  Hezekiah's  vainglorious 
display  of  his  treasures — his  possession  of  those  treasures 
to  display,  at  the  peculiar  crisis  when  the  embassy  arrived, 
though  shortly  before  his  poverty  was  excessive,  confirmed 
as  a  matter  of  fact  beyond  all  reasonable  doubt,  by  an  un- 
designed coincidence.  The  premises  then  being  thus  es- 
tablished in  truth,  and  the  consequences  flowing  from  them 
being  so  close  and  so  natural,  it  is  less  easy  to  suppose  them 
fictitious  than  prophetical. 


IV 


There  is  another  ingredient  in  the  details  of  this  in- 
vasion of  Sennacherib  which  when  compared  with  a  pas- 
sage in  Isaiah,  furnishes,  I  think,  a  probable  coincidence; 
and  tends  to  hem  round  the  wonderful  event  which  is  said 
to  have  attended  that  invasion,  with  still  more  evidence  of 
truth. 

When  the  king  of  Assyria  sent  his  host  against  Jeru- 
salem on  (his  occasion,  the  persons  deputed  by  Hezckiah 
to  confer  with  his  captains,  were,  we  read,  "  Eliakim  the 
son  of  Hilkiah,  which  was  over  his  household,  and  Shebna 
the  scribe,   and  Joah  the  so)i   of  Asaph  the  recorder."1 

I  2  Kings  xviii.  18. 


PART    III.  PROPHETICAL    SCRIPTURES.  237 

Their  names  occur  more  than  once,1  and  still  with  this 
distinction,  namely,  that  the  parentage  of  Eliakim  and  of 
Joah  is  given,  but  not  that  of  Shebna  :  of  the  two  former  it 
is  told  whose  sons  they  were,  as  well  as  what  offices  they 
held  ;  whilst  Shebna  is  designated  by  his  office  only. 

Now  is  there  a  reason  for  this,  or  is  it  merely  the  effect 
of  accident?  The  omission  certainly  may  be  accidental, 
but  I  will  suggest  a  ground  for  thinking  it  not  so.  and  will 
leave  my  readers  to  be  the  judges  of  the  matter. 

In  the  twenty-second  chapter  of  Isaiah  (v.  15  et  seq.) 
we  find  the  prophet  delivering  a  message  of  wrath  against 
one  Shebna,  in  the  following  terms :  "  Thus  saith  the  Lord 
God  of  hosts,  Go,  get  thee  unto  this  treasurer,  even  unto 
Shebna,  which  is  over  the  tiouse,  and  say,  What  hast 
thou  here  7  and  whom  hast  thou  here,  that  thou  hast 
hewed  thee  out  a  sepulchre  here,  as  he  that  heweth  him 
out  a  sepulchre  on  high,  and  that  graveth  an  habitation 
for  himself  in  a  rock  ?  Behold,  the  Lord  will  carry  thee 
away  with  a  mighty  captivity,  and  will  surely  cover  thee. 
He  will  surely  violently  turn  and  toss  thee  like  a  ball  into 
ii  large  country:  there  shalt  thou  die,  and  there  the  chari- 
ots of  thy  glory  shall  be  the  shame  of  thy  Lord's  house. 
And  I  will  drive  thee  from  thy  station,  and  from  thy  state 
shall  he  pull  thee  down."  The  purport  of  which  rebuke 
is,  that  whereas  Shebna  was  busily  engaged  in  construct- 
ing for  himself  a  sumptuous  sepulchre  at  Jerusalem,  as 
though  he  and  his  posterity  were  to  have  that  for  their 
burial-place  forever,  he  might  spare  himself  the  pains,  for 
that  God,  for  some  transgression  of  his  which  is  not  men- 
tioned, was  about  to  depose  him  from  the  post  of  honor 
which  he  held,  and  banish  him  from  his  city,  and  leave 
him  to  die  in  a  strange  land. 

1  1  Kings  xix.  2;  Isaiah  xxxvi.  3. 


238  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART.    III. 

It  is  true  that  Shebna  is  here  called  the  "  treasurer," 
whereas  the  Shebna  mentioned  in  the  book  of  Kings,  with 
whom  the  coincidence  requires  that  he  should  be  identified, 
is  called  "  the  scribe,"  but  the  two  periods  are  not  neces- 
sarily the  same,  and  he  might  have  been  "  the  treasurer," 
at  the  one,  and  "  the  scribe,"  at  the  other  ;  for  that  he  is 
the  same  man  I  can  have  no  doubt,  not  merely  from  Shebna 
in  either  case  belonging  clearly  to  the  king's  court,  which 
greatly  limits  the  conditions  ;  but  from  Eliakim  the  son  of 
Hilkiah  being  again  spoken  of  immediately  in  connection 
with  him  in  the  passage  of  Isaiah  (ver.  20),  as  he  had  been 
in  the  passage  of  the  Book  of  Kings.  It  being  presumed, 
then,  that  the  Shebna  of  Isaiah  and  the  Shebna  of  the 
Book  of  Kings  is  the  same  person,  I  account  for  the  omis- 
sion of  his  parentage  in  the  history  from  the  circumstance 
of  his  being  a  foreigner  at  Jerusalem,  whilst  Eliakim  and 
Joah  were  native  Jews  whose  genealogy  was  known  ;  and 
this  fact  I  conclude  from  the  expression  in  Isaiah  which  I 
have  printed  in  Italics,  "  What  hast  thou  here,  and  whom 
hast  thou  here,  that  thou  hast  hewed  thee  out  a  sepulchre 
here?"  Jerusalem  not  having  been  the  burial-place  of  his 
family,  because  he  did  not  belong  to  Jerusalem. 


In  the  sixty-second  chapter  of  this  same  prophet  Isaiah, 
reference  is  made  to  the  future  restoration  of  the  Jewish 
Church  ;  in  the  first  sense,  perhaps,  and  as  a  frame-work 
of  more,  its  restoration  from  Babylon  ;  in  a  second,  its 
eventual  restoration  to  Christ,  and  the  coming  in  of  the 
Jew  and  Gentile  together.  "  And  thou  shalt  no  more  be 
termed  Forsaken," — so  Isaiah  here  expresses  himself  con- 
cerning Jerusalem, — "neither  shall  thy  land  any  more  be 


PART    III.  PROPHETICAL    SCRIPTURES.  .  239 

termed  Desolate  ;  but  thou  shalt  be  called  Hephzi-bah, 
and  thy  land  Bealah:  for  the  Lord  delighteth  in  thee; 
and  thy  land  shall  be  married."  (ver.  4.) 

The  figure  here  employed  is  that  of  a  marriage  ;  there 
is  to  be  a  marriage  between  God  and  his  Church  :  that  di- 
vorce from  God,  which  the  sins  of  Jerusalem  had  effected, 
was  to  be  done  away,  and  the  nuptial  bond  be  renewed. 
Jerusalem  was  to  be  no  longer  as  a  widow,  Forsaken  and 
Desolate,  but  to  be  as  a  bride,  and  to  be  called  Heph- 
zi-bah, i.  e.  "  in  her  is  my  delight,"  and  "  Beulah"  i.  e. 
married.  The  verse  immediately  following  the  one  I  have- 
produced,  still  continues  the  same  figure  :  "  For  as  a  young 
man  marrieth  a  virgin,  so  shall  thy  sons  marry  (or  again 
live  with)  thee  'r.  and  as  the  bridegroom  rejoiceth  over  his 
bride,  so  shall  thy  God  rejoice  over  thee"  (ver.  5).  Now 
it  is  impossible  to  read  the  prophets  with  the  least  atten- 
tion, and  not  discover  that  the  incidents  upon  which  they 
raise  their  oracular  superstructure  are  in  general  real  mat- 
ters of  fact  which  have  fallen  in  their  way.  When  they 
soar  even  into  their  sublimest  flights,  they  often  take  their 
spring  from  some  solid  and  substantial  footing.  Our  Lord 
was  acting  quite  in  the  spirit  of  the  older  prophets  when 
he  advanced  from  his  observations  on  the  temple  before 
him,  and  the  desolation  it  was  soon  to  suffer,  to  the  final 
consummation  of  all  things,  and  the  breaking  up  of  the 
universal  visible  world  ;  and  the  commentary  of  those  who 
would  endeavor  to  construe  the  whole  by  a  reference  to  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem  only,  is  not  imbued  with  the 
spirit  of  the  prophets  of  ancient  times. 

From  the  passage  before  us,  then,  it  should  seem  that 
some  nuptial  ceremony  was  the  accident  of  the  day  which 
gave  the  prophet  an  opportunity  of  uttering  his  parable 
concerning  the  future  fortune  of  Jerusalem.  Can  we  trace 
any  such  event  in  the  history  of  those  days  likely  from  its 


240  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    III. 

importance  to  arrest  public  attention,  and  thus  to  furnish 
Isaiah  with  this  figure?  I  do  not  say  positively  that  we 
can — nevertheless  the  name  of  Hephzi-bah.  which  he 
assigns  to  this  his  new  Jerusalem,  may  throw  some  light 
upon  our  inquiry  ;  for  in  the  twenty-first  chapter  of  the 
second  Book  of  Kings  I  read  that  "  Manasseh  "  (the  son 
of  Hezekiah)  "  was  twelve  years  old  when  he  began  to 
reign,  and  that  he  reigned  fifty  and  five  years  in  Jeru- 
salem, and  that  his  mother's  name  was  Hephzi-bah."1 
It  is  not  improbable,  therefore,  that  the  royal  nuptials  of 
Hezekiah  occurred  about  the  time  of  this  prophecy  ;  and 
that  Isaiah,  after  the  manner  of  the  prophets  in  general, 
availed  himself  of  the  passing  event,  and  of  the  name  of 
the  bride,  as  a  vehicle  for  the  tidings  which  he  had  to 
communicate.  This  too  may  seem  the  more  likely,  be- 
cause this  prophecy  of  Isaiah  does  not  appear  to  have  been 
spoken  at  an  early  period  of  his  mission,  but  subsequently 
to  the  sickness  and  recovery  of  Hezekiah,  (if  the  prophecies 
at  least  are  arranged  at  all  in  the  order  in  which  they 
were  delivered  ;)  neither  is  it  probable  that  the  marriage  of 
Hezekiah  was  contracted  till  after  that  same  sickness  and 
recovery,  seeing  that  his  son  and  successor  was  but  twelve 
years  old  at  his  father's  death,  which  happened,  we  know, 
fifteen  years  after  his  illness. 


VI. 

But  it  is  not  by  single  and  separate  coincidences  only 
that  the  authority  of  these  prophecies  is  upheld :  there  are 
some  coincidences  of  a  more  comprehensive  and  general 
kind  that  argue  the  same  truth.     Thus,  the  scenes  amongst 

1  2  Kings  xxi.  1. 


PART    III.  PROPHETICAL    SCRIPTURES.  241 

which  Isaiah  seems  to  write,  indicate  the  commonwealth 
of  Israel  to  be  yet  standing.  He  remonstrates,  in  the 
name  of  God,  with  the  people  for  a  hypocritical  obser- 
vance of  the  Fast-days  (ch.  lviii.  3) ;  for  exacting  usurious 
profits  nevertheless  ;  for  prolonging  unlawfully  the  years 
of  bondage  (v.  6)  ;  for  profaning  the  Sabbaths  (v.  13) ; 
for  confounding  all  distinction  between  clean  and  unclean 
meats  (ch.  lxv.  4  ;  lxvi.  17.)  He  makes  perpetual  allu- 
sions, too,  to  the  existence  of  false  prophets  in  Jerusalem, 
as  though  this  class  of  persons  was  very  common  whilst 
Isaiah  was  writing ;  the  most  likely  persons  in  the  world 
to  be  engendered  by  troubled  times.  And  above  all,  he 
reviles  the  people  for  their  gross  and  universal  idolatry  :  a 
sin,  which  in  all  its  aspects,  is  pursued  from  the  fortieth 
chapter  to  the  last  with  a  ceaseless,  inextinguishable,  un* 
mitigated  storm  of  mockery,  contempt  and  scorn.  With 
what  position  of  the  prophet  can  these,  and  many  similar 
allusions,  be  reconciled,  but  with  that  of  a  man  dwelling 
in  Judea  before  the  captivity,  during  a  period,  which,  as 
historically  described  in  the  latter  chapters  of  the  Books  of 
Kings  and  Chronicles,  presents  the  express  counterpart  of 
those  references  in  the  prophet?  Hezekiah  and  Josiah, 
the  two  redeeming  princes  of  that  time,  serving,  as  break- 
ers, to  make  manifest  the  fury  with  which  the  tide  of 
abominations  of  every  kind  was  running.  I  say,  to  what 
other  period,  and  to  what  other  position  of  the  writer,  does 
the  internal  evidence  of  Isaiah  point?  indirectly  imlo.l, 
but  not  on  that  account,  in  a  manner  the  less  conclu 
Had  he  taken  up  his  parable  during  the  Babylonish  bon- 
dage, would  there  not  have  been  frequent  and  inadvertent 
allusions  to  the  circumstances  of  Babylon  ?  Could  his 
style  have  escaped  the  contagious  influence  of  the  scenes 
around  him?  even  as  the  case  actually  is  with  Daniel, 
whose  dwelling  was  at  Babylon.     Yet  in  Isaiah  there  are 

21 


242  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART  III. 

no  allusions  of  this  nature.  It  is  of  Jerusalem,  and  not  of 
Babylon,  that  his  roll  savors  throughout ;  of  the  land  of 
Israel,  and  not  of  Chaklea.  Moreover,  it  is  of  Jerusalem 
before  the  captivity;  for  after  that  trying  furnace  through 
which  the  Jewish  nation  was  condemned  to  pass,  it  was 
disinfected  of  idolatry.  Nay,  a  horror  of  idolatry  suc- 
ceeded, great  as  had  been  the  propensity  to  it  aforetime  ; 
the  whole  nation  baring  their  necks  to  the  sword,  rather 
than  admit  within  their  walls  even  a  Roman  Eagle : 
whilst  the  ritual  observances  of  the  law,  so  far  from  falling 
into  desuetude  and  contempt,  were  now  kept  with  even  a 
superstitious  scrupulosity. 

I  think  then  that  the  several  undesigned  coincidences 
between  passages  in  Isaiah,  and  others  in  the  Books  of 
Kings  and  Chronicles,  which  have  been  now  adduced, 
enough  to  prove  that  the  prophet  was  contemporary  with 
Uzziah,  Jotham,  Ahaz  and  llezekiah,  and  saw  his  vision 
in  their  days,  even  as  its  title  declares.  The  mere  intro- 
duction of  the  names  of  these  princes  into  the  pages  of 
Isaiah,  is  not  the  argument  on  which  I  rely.  It  might  be 
said,  however  improbably,  that  an  author  of  a  date  much 
lower,  might  have  admitted  these  names,  and  fragments 
of  history  connected  with  them,  into  his  rhapsody,  in  order 
to  five  it  a  coloring  of  fact — but  it  is  the  indirect  coin- 
cident- between  the  prophet  and  the  history,  which  veri- 
fies the  date  of  the  former — allusions,  mere  allusions,  to 
obscure  servants  of  these  sovereigns  (known  to  be  such); 
i  ■  marriage  of  the  day;  to  the  stopping  of  a  well ;  to 
lh  Foolish  exhibition  of  a  treasure — allusions,  indeed,  in 
some  cases  so  indistinct,  that  the  full  drift  of  the  prophet 
.]  haye  escaped  us,  but  for  the  historian.  Such  an  ar- 
gument, ought  to  satisfy  us  that  Isaiah  was  as  surely 
alive,  and  dead,  long  before  the  Babylonish  captivity,  which 
he  so  accurately  foretold,  even  to  the  deliverance  from  it — 


PART    III.  PROPHETICAL    SCRIPTURES.  243 

a  still  further  reach  into  futurity— as  that  Ahaz  and  Heze- 
kiah  lived  and  died  long  before  it ;  an  argument  therefore, 
which  justifies  the  Jews  in  their  enrolment  of  his  name 
amongst  the  most  distinguished  of  their  prophets,  though 
they  had  no  other  ground  for  so  doing  than  their  knowl- 
edge of  his  exact  prediction  of  the  events  of  those  days  ; 
and  which  must  leave  us  without  excuse  in  our  incredulity, 
born  as  we  are  after  the  advent  of  the  Messiah,  which 
forms  so  principal  a  subject  of  Isaiah's  writings  besides  ; 
and  whose  character  and  Gospel  we  have  found  to  corres- 
pond in  so  remarkable  a  manner  to  the  description  of  both 
which  they  contain.  For  it  is  not  the  least  singular,  or 
the  least  satisfactory  feature  in  the  writings  of  Isaiah,  that 
they  should  thus  relate  to  two  distinct  periods,  separated 
by  a  wide  interval  of  time,  and  be  found  to  be  so  exact  in 
both  ;  that  they  should  have  first  taken  for  their  field  the 
events  preceding  and  accompanying  the  captivity,  foretell- 
ing them  so  faithfully  as  to  convince  the  Jew  that  he  was 
one  of  the  greatest  of  his  prophets :  that  some  hundreds 
of  years  should  then  be  allowed  to  elapse,  of  which  they 
are  silent ;  and  that  then  they  should  break  out  again  on 
the  subject  of  a  second  and  altogether  different  series  of  in- 
cidents, so  deeply  interesting  to  the  Christian,  and  be  found 
by  him,  in  his  turn,  to  be  so  wonderfully  true  to  them — so 
wonderfully  true  to  them,  that  he  cannot  but  be  surprised 
that  the  Jew  whose  acceptance  of  the  prophet  was  even 
already  secured  by  the  previous  stage  of  his  prophecy,  of 
which  we  have  been  now  examining  the  evidence,  should 
sliil  be  unable  to  see  in  him  the  prophet  of  Jesus  Christ 
of  Nazareth  too. 


244  THE    VERACITY'  OF    THE  PART    IIL 


VII. 

We  next  come  to  the  writings  of  Jeremiah,  which  do 
not  however  supply  many  arguments  of  the  kind  I  am 
collecting,  nor  perhaps  any  so  persuasive  in  their  character 
as  some  which  I  have  produced  from  Isaiah.  Still  there 
are  several  which  at  least  deserve  to  be  brought  before 
you. 

In  the  midst  of  a  denunciation  of  evils  to  come  upon 
Jerusalem  for  her  wickedness,  which  we  find  in  the  thir- 
teenth chapter  of  Jeremiah  ;  a  denunciation  for  the  most 
part  expressed  in  general  terms,  and  in  a  manner  not  con- 
veying any  very  exact  allusions,  we  read  at  the  eighteenth 
verse,  ':  Say  unto  the  King  and  to  the  Queen,  Humble 
yourselves :  sit  down,  for  your  principalities  shall  come 
down,  even  the  crown  of  your  glory."  Jeremiah  does  not 
here  tell  us  the  name  either  of  the  king  or  the  queen  re- 
ferred to — but  as  the  queens  of  Israel  do  not  figure  prom- 
inently in  the  history  of  that  nation,  except  where  there  is 
something  peculiar  in  their  characters  or  condition  to  bring 
them  out,  it  may  be  thought  there  was  something  of  the 
kind  in  this  instance  :  and  accordingly  we  have  mention 
made  in  the  twenty- fourth  chapter  of  the  second  Book  of 
Kings  of  an  invasion  of  the  Cbaldeans,  attended  by  cir- 
cumstances corresponding  to  what  we  might  expect  from 
this  exclamation  of  Jeremiah.  It  was  the  second  of  the 
three  invasions  which  occurred  at  that  time  within  a  few 
years  of  one  another,  to  which  I  allude  ;'  an  invasion  made 
by  the  servants  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  followed  by  Nebuch- 
adnezzar himself  in  person.  On  this  occasion  it  is  said, 
that  "  Jehoiachin  the  king  of  Judah  went  out  to  the  king 

1  2  Kings  xxiv.  1,  10;  xxv.  1. 


PART    III.  PROPHETICAL    SCRIPTURES.  245 

of  Babylon,  he,  and  his  mother,  and  his  servants,  and  his 
princes,  and  his  officers  :  and  the  king  of  Babylon  took 
him  in  the  eighth  year  of  his  reign,"  (vcr.  12 :)  and  again, 
u  and  he  carried  away  Jehoiachin  to  Babylon,  and  the 
king's  mother,  and  the  king's  wives,  and  his  officers,  and 
the  mighty  of  the  land,  those  carried  he  into  captivity  from 
Jerusalem  to  Babylon."     (ver.  15.) 

As  Jehoiachin  was  at  that  time  only  eighteen  years  old, 
and  had  reigned  no  more  than  three  months,  (ver.  S,)  the 
queen  dowager  was  no  doubt  still  a  person  of  consequence, 
possibly  his  adviser,  at  any  rate  an  influential  person  as 
yet,  so  short  a  period  having  elapsed  since  the  death  of 
her  husband  the  last  king  :  and  thus  an  object  of  pity  to 
the  prophet,  and  one  that  called  for  express  notice  and 
remark. 


VIII. 

Jeremiah  xxii.  10 — 12,  furnishes  us  with  another  in- 
stance of  coincidence  without,  design,  calculated  to  establish 
our  belief  in  that  prophet.  We  there  read,  "  Weep  not  for 
the  dead,  neither  bemoan  him  :  but  weep  for  him  that 
goelh  away  ;  for  he  shajl  return  no  more,  nor  see  his 
native  country.  For  thus  saith  the  Lord  touching  Shallum 
the  son  of  Jdsiah,  king  of  Judah,  which  reigned  instead 
of  Josiah  his  father,  which  went  forth  out  of  this  place  ; 
He  shall  not  return  thither  any  more  :  but  he  shall  die  in 
the  place  whither  they  have  led  him  captive,  and  shall  see 
this  land  no  more." 

Now  this  passage  evidently  relates  to  several  events 
familiar  to  the  minds  of  those  whom  the  prophet  was  ad- 
dressing. It  is  a  series  of  allusions  to  circumstances  known 
to  them,  but  by  no  means  sufficiently  developed  to  put  us 


246  THE    VERACITY    OP    THE  PART    III. 

in  possession  of  the  tale  without  some  further  key.  It 
should  appear  that  there  had  been  a  great  public  mourn- 
ing in  Jerusalem  :  but  it  is  not  distinctly  said  for  whom  ; 
it  might  be  supposed  for  Josiah,  whose  name  occurs  in 
the  paragraph  ; — that  another  calamity  had  come  upon 
its  heels  very  shortly  afterwards,  calling,  as  the  prophet 
thought,  for  expressions  of  national  sorrow  which  might 
even  supersede  the  other  ;  a  prince,  the  son  of  Josiah,  led 
away  captive  into  a  foreign  land  ;  but  whither  he  was  thus 
led,  or  by  whom,  is  not  declared.  The  whole  evidently 
the  discourse  of  a  man  living  amongst  the  scenes  he  touches 
upon,  and  conscious  that  he  has  no  need  to  do  more  than 
touch  upon  them  to  make  himself  understood  by  his 
hearers. 

Now  let  us  turn  to  the  thirty-fifth  and  thirty-sixth  chap- 
ters of  the  second  Book  of  Chronicles,  where  certain  histor- 
ical details  of  the  events  of  those  times  are  preserved,  and 
the  key  will  be  supplied.  In  the  former  chapter  I  find  that 
the  death  of  Josiah,  a  king  who  had  been  a  blessing  to  his 
kingdom,  and  who  was  slain  by  an  arrow,  as  he  fought 
against  the  Egyptians,  was  in  fact  an  event  that  filled  all 
Jerusalem  with  consternation  and  grief:  "  he  died,  and  was 
buried  in  one  of  the  sepulchres  of  his  fathers.  And  all  Ju- 
dah  and  Jerusalem  mourned  for  Josiah.  And  Jeremiah  la- 
mented for  Josiah  ;  and  all  the  singing  men  and  the  sing- 
ing women  spake  of  Josiah  in  their  lamentations  unto  this 
day,  and  made  them  an  ordinance  in  Israel:  and,  behold, 
they  are  written  in  the  Lamentations."1  Here  we  have  the 
first  feature  in  Jeremiah's  very  transient  sketch  completed. 

I  look  at  the  continuation  of  the  history  in  the  next 
chapter,  and  I  there  find  that  the  son  of  Josiah,  Jehoahaz 
by  name,  (and  not  called  Shallum  in  the  Chronicles.)  "be- 

i  2  Chron.  xxv.  24,  25. 


PART    III.  PROPHETICAL    SCRIPTURES.  247 

gan  to  reign,  and  that  lie  reigned  three  mouths  m  Jerusa- 
lem; and  the  king  of  Egypt  put  him  down  at  Jerusalem, 
and  condemned  the  land  in  a  hundred  talents  ol  silver  and 
a  talent  of  gold.     And  the  king  of  Egypt  made  Eliakim 
his  brother  king  over  Judah  and  Jerusalem,  and  turned  Ins 
name  to  Jehoiakim.    And  Necho  took  Jehpahaz  his  brother, 
and  carried  him  to  Egypt.-     Here  we  have  the  other  out- 
lines of  Jeremiah's  picture  filled  up.     The  second  calamity 
did  come,  it  appears,  on  the  heels  of  the  first,  fur  it  was  only 
after  an  interval  of  three  months.     The  king  of  Egypt,  we 
now  find,  was  the  conqueror  who  carried  the  prince  away, 
and  Egypt  was  the  country  to  which  he  was  conducted. 
And  though  the  victim  is  called  Jehoahaz  in  the  history, 
and  Shallum  in  the  prophet,  the  facts  concerning  him  tally 
so  exactly,  that  there  can  be  no  doubt  of  the  identity  of 
the  man  ;  whilst  the  absence  of  all  attempt  on  either  side 
to  explain  or  reconcile  this  difficulty  about  the  name,  is  a 
clear  proof  that  neither  passage  was  written  in  reference  to 
the  other  :  though  it  may  be  conjectured,  that  as  Necho 
gave  a  new  name  to  Eliakim,1  the  one  brother,  so  he  might 
have  done  the  like  by  the  other,  and  called  him  Shalium 
instead  of  Jehoahaz. 

But  there  is  a  further  hint.  "Weep  not,"  says  Jere- 
miah, t:  for  the  dead  ;  but  weep  for  him  that  goeth  away, 
for  he  shall  return  no  more."  This  should  imply  that  the 
prince  of  whom  Jerusalem  was  thus  bereft,  was  acceptable 
to  his  people  ;  more  acceptable  than  lie  who  was  to  simply 
his  place.  The  thing  to  be  lamented  was  that  he  would 
return  no  more.  It  is  true  that  (or  the  little  time  Jehoahaz 
reigned,  he  did  evil  in  the  sight  of  the  Lord  ;a  but  so  did 
Jehoiakim  ;3  so  that  in  this  respect  there  was  nothing  to 
choose ;  and  in  the  condition  of  the  Jews  at  that  time,  an 

i  2  King*  ixSL  Si.  ■  lb.  xxiii.  30.         3  2  Chron.  xxxrl  5. 

21* 


248  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    III. 

irreligious  prince  (for  that  would  be  the  meaning  of  the 
term)  would  not  necessarily  be  an  unpopular  one.  I  repeat, 
therefore,,  that  the  words  of  Jeremiah  seem  to  indicate  that 
the  prince  who  had  been  carried  away  was  more  accepta- 
ble than  the  one  who  was  left  in  his  stead.  I  now  turn, 
once  again,  to  the  thirty-sixth  chapter  of  the  second  Book 
of  Chronicles,  (v.  1,)  or  to  the  twenty-third  chapter  of  the 
second  Book  of  Kings,  (v.  30,)  and  I  there  discover  (for  the 
incident  is  not  obvious)  a  particular  with  regard  to  this  prince 
who  was  carried  away  captive  by  Necho,  and  to  his  brother 
who  was  appointed  to  reign  in  his  stead,  very  remarka- 
bly coinciding  with  these  innuendoes  of  Jeremiah.  For 
in  the  former  reference  it  is  said,  that  on  the  death  of  Jo- 
siah,  "  the  peoj)le  of  the  land  took  Jehoahaz^  (the  Shallum 
of  the  prophet)  "  the  son  of  Josiah,  and  made  him  king  in 
his  father's  stead  at  Jerusalem  :  and  Jehoahaz,"  it  contin- 
ues, "was  twenty  and  three  years  old  when  he  began  to 
reign.;'  Then  comes  the  history  of  his  deposal,  abduction, 
and  of  the  substitution  of  his  brother  Eliakim  to  reign  in 
Jerusalem  in  his  place,  under  the  name  of  Jehoiakim  :  '-and 
Jehoiakim,"  it  is  added,  "  was  twenty  and  five  years  old 
when  he  began  to  reign."  Now  inasmuch  as  Jehoahaz 
had  reigned  only  three  months,  Jehoahaz  must  have  been 
younger  than  Jehoiakim  by  nearly  two  years  :  how  then 
came  the  younger  son  to  succeed  his  father  on  the  throne 
in  the  first  instance  ?  "  The  j)cople  of  the  land  took  him" 
we  have  read  ;  i.  e.  he  was  the  more  popular  character,  and 
therefore  they  set  him  on  the  throne  in  spite  of  the  supe- 
rior claims  of  the  first-born.  And  a  phrase  which  occurs  in 
the  latter  of  the  two  references  confirms  this  view  ;  for  the 
people  are  there  said  not  only  to  have  taken  him,  but  to 
have  "  anointed  hint' — a  ceremonial,  which,  whether  inva- 
riably observed  or  not  in  cases  of  ordinary  descent  of  the 


PART    III.  PROPHETICAL    SCRIPTURES.  249 

crown,  never  seems  to  have  been  omitted  in  cases  of  doubt- 
ful succession.1 

This  history,  it  will  be.  seen,  supplies  with  great  success 
the  particulars  which  are  incidentally  omitted  in  the  pro- 
phecy, though  clearly  constructed  with  no  such  intention  ; 
and  fixes  the  date  of  Jeremiah  to  a  period  long  before  sev- 
eral of  the  events  which  he  foretells. 


IX. 

Of  Hosea,  we  read  that  he  prophesied  "  in  the  days 
of  Uzziah,  Jotham,  Ahaz,  and  Hezekiah,  kings  of  Ju- 
dah."  (i.  1.) 

In  the  course  of  this  prophecy  we  find  frequent  inciden- 
tal allusions  to  a  scarcity  of  food  in  the  land  of  Israel. 

"  Therefore  will  I  return,  and  take  away  my  corn  in  the 
time  thereof,  and  my  wine  in  the  season  thereof,"  (ii.  9.)  u  I 
will  destroy  her  vines  and  her  fig-trees,"  (11.)  "  Therefore 
shall  the  land  mourn,  and  every  one  that  dwelleth  therein 
shall  languish,  with  the  beasts  of  the  field,  and  with  the 
fowls  of  heaven  ;  yea,  the  fishes  of  the  sea  also  shall  be 
taken  away,"  (iv.  3.)  "  They  have  not  cried  unto  me  with 
their  heart,  when  they  howled  upon  their  beds  :  they  as- 
sembled themselves  for  corn  and  wine,  and  they  rebel 
against  me,"  (vii.  14.)  "  They  have  sown  the  wind,  and 
they  shall  reap  the  whirlwind  :  it  hath  no  stalk  :  the  bud 
shall  yield  no  meal,"  (viii.  7.)  "  The  floor  and  the  wine- 
press shall  not  feed  them,  and  the  new  wine  shall  fail 
them."  (ix.  2.) 

Again,  Amos  is  said  to  have  prophesied  concerning  Israel 
"in  the  days  of  Uzziah,  king  of  Judah,  and  in  the  days 
of  Jeroboam  the  son  of  Joash,  king  of  Israel,"  (i.  1.) 

1  See  '3  Kintrs  ix.  3,  and  Patrick  in  loc.  and  also  on  9  Kinsrs  xxiii.  30. 


250  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    III. 

In  this  prophet  also,  in  like  manner,  as  in  the  former, 
we  find  incidental  allusions  to  dearth  in  the  land.  "The 
habitations  of  the  shepherds  shall  mourn,  and  the  top  of 
Carmel  shall  wither,"  (i.  2.)  "  I  also  have  given  you  clean- 
ness of  teeth  in  all  your  cities,  and  want  of  bread  in  all 
your  places,  yet  have  ye  not  returned  unto  me,  saith  the 
Lord.  And  also  I  have  withholden  the  rain  from  you, 
when  there  were  yet  three  months  to  the  harvest ...  So 
two  or  three  cities  wandered  unto  one  city,  to  drink  water; 
but  they  were  not  satisfied ...  I  have  smitten  you  with 
blasting  and  mildew :  when  your  gardens,  and  your  vine- 
yards, and  your  fig-trees,  and  your  olive-trees  increased,  the 
palmerworm  devoured  them  . . .  they  shall  call  the  husband- 
man to  the  mourning . . .  And  in  all  vineyards  shall  be  wail- 
ing." (iv.  6.  7,  S,  9 ;  v.  16.  17.) — With  more  to  the  same 
effect  in  both  these  prophets. 

Now,  if  we  turn  to  2  Chron.  xxvi.  10,  where  we  have  a 
brief  history  of  the  reign  of  this  same  king  Uzziah,  under 
whom  we  have  seen  they  lived,  we  shall  find  a  feature  of 
it  recorded,  which  seems  to  tally  extremely  well  with  this 
representation  of  the  condition  of  Israel.  For  it  is  there 
told  of  him,  amongst  other  things,  that  "  he  built  towers  in 
the  desert,  and  digged  many  wells:  for  he  had  much  cat- 
tle, both  in  the  low  country  and  in  the  plains:  husband- 
men also,  and  vine-dressers  in  the  mountains,  and  in  Car- 
mel :  for  he  loved  husbandry."  As  though  the  precarious 
state  of  the  supply  of  food  in  the  country  had  turned  the 
king's  attention  in  a  particular  manner  to  the  improvement 
of  its  agriculture. 

X. 

The  following  is  an  example  of  a  case  where  the  hints 
which  transpire  in  the  prophet  agree  very  well  with  par- 


PART    III.  PROPHETICAL    SCRIPTURES.  251 

ticulars  recorded  in  the  history  ;  but  perhaps  that  is  all  that 
can  be  said  of  it  with  safety :  the  language  of  the  prophet 
not  being  sufficiently  specific  to  fix  the  coincidence  to  a 
certainty.  The  reader  must  judge  for  himself  of  the  value 
of  the  argument  in  this  particular  instance. 

We  read  in  Amos  (vii.  10,  11)  as  follows:  "Then  Araa- 
ziah  the  priest  of  Beth-el  sent  to  Jeroboam  king  of  Israel, 
saying,  Amos  hath  conspired  against  thee  in  the  midst  c>f 
the  house  of  Israel :  the  land  is  not  able  to  bear  all  his 
words.  For  thus  Amos  saith,  Jeroboam  shall  die  by  the 
sword,  and  Israel  shall  surely  be  led  away  captive  out  of 
their  own  land." 

We  have  here  a  priest  of  Beth-el,  i.  e.  of  the  calves,  de- 
nouncing to  the  king  of  Israel  the  prophet  Amos,  as  one 
who  was  unsettling  the  minds  of  the  people  by  his  prophe- 
cies— prophecies  which  uthe  land  was  not  able  to  bear." 
It  would  seem  then  from  this  phrase  that  the  state  was  in 
a  critical  condition  ;  such  a  condition  as  gave  double  force 
to  a  prediction  which  went  to  deprive  it  of  its  king,  and  to 
consign  its  children  to  bondage.  It  was  ill  able  to  spare 
Jeroboam,  or  bear  up  against  evil  forebodings.  This  we 
gather  from  the  passage  of  Amos. 

Let  us  now  turn  to  the  fourteenth  chapter  of  the  second 
Book  of  Kings.  There  we  read,  first  of  all,  of  Jeroboam, 
that  "he  departed  not  from  all  the  sins  of  Jeroboam,  the 
son  of  Nebat,  who  made  Israel  to  sin,"  (ver.  23) — i.  c.  that 
he  strenuously  supported  the  worship  of  the  calves.  This 
fact  then  makes  it  highly  probable  that  Aniaziah,  a  priest 
of  Beth-el,  would  find  in  Jeroboam  a  ready  listener  to  any 
sinister  construction  he  might  put  upon  the  words  of  a 
prophet  of  the  Lord,  like  Amos. 

W  e  further  learn,  that  this  same  Jeroboam  was  one  of 
the  most  successful  princes  that  had  sat  upon  the  throne 
of  Israel ;  restoring  her  coasts,  and  recovering  her  posses- 


252  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    III. 

sions  by  force  of  arms  (ver.  25,  28) :  a  sovereign,  therefore, 
to  be  missed  by  the  nation  he  ruled,  whenever  he  should 
be  removed  ;  and  especially  if  there  was  nobody  forthcom- 
ing- calculated  to  replace  him.  Let  us  see  how  this  was. 
Jeroboam  reigned  forty-one  years,  (2  Kings  xiv.  23,)  but 
in  the  twenty-seventh  of  Jeroboam,  Azariah  (or  Uzziah  as 
he  is  called  in  the  Chronicles,  (2  Chron.  xxvi.  1),  began  to 
reign  in  Judah  (2  Kings  xv.  1) ;  i.  e.  Jeroboam's  reign  ex- 
pired in  the  fifteenth  of  Azariah.  But  his  son  and  succes- 
sor Zachariah,  for  some  reason  or  other,  and  owing  to  some 
impediment  which  does  not  transpire,  did  not  begin  his 
reign  over  Samaria  till  the  thirty-eighth  of  Azariah  (ib.  8). 
Therefore  the  throne  of  Samaria  must  have  been  in  some 
sort  vacant  twenty- three  years  :  nor  did  the  anarchy  cease 
even  then,  for  Zachariah  having  at  length  ascended  the 
throne,  after  a  reign  of  six  months,  was  murdered  publicly 
"before  the  people;"  and  Shallum,  the  usurper  who  suc- 
ceeded him,  shared  the  same  fate  after  a  reign  of  a  single 
month  (ib.  13);  and  Menahem,  the  successor  of  Shallum, 
was  reduced  to  the  necessity  of  buying  off  an  invasion  of 
the  Assyrians  (the  first  incursion  of  that  people)  under  Pul 
(ib.  19) ;  Assyria  having  in  the  meanwhile  grown  great, 
and  now  taking  advantage  of  the  ruinous  condition  of 
Israel,  consequent  on  the  death  of  Jeroboam,  to  come 
against  her.1 

Amaziah,  therefore,  might  well  declare  that  the  land 
was  not  able  to  bear  the  words  of  Amos,  for  in  all  proba- 
bility he  could  foresee;  from  the  actual  circumstances  of  the 
country,  the  troubles  that  were  likely  to  ensue  whenever 
Jeroboam's  reign  should  be  brought  to  an  end. 

1  This  is  the  first  mention  of  the  kingdom  of  Assyria  since  the  days  of 
Nimrod  (Gen.  X.  11).  It  seems  to  have  hecn  inconsiderable  when  the 
eighty-thin  I  Psalm  was  penned,  in  which  Assur  is  represented  as  helping 
the  children  of  Lot.  (v.  8.) 


PART    III.  PROPHETICAL    SCRIPTURES.  253 

Here  then,  I  say,  the  language  of  the  prophet  is  at  least 
very  consistent  with  the  crisis  of  which  he  speaks,  as  rep- 
resented in  the  Book  of  Kings. 

I  could  add  several  other  examples  of  this  class,  i.  e. 
where  allusions  in  the  prophets  are  very  sufficiently  re- 
sponded to  by  events  recorded  in  the  historical  Books  of 
Scripture,  but  still  the  want  of  precision  in  the  terms  makes 
it  difficult  to  affirm  the  coincidence  between  the  two  docu- 
ments with  confidence  ;  and  therefore  I  have  thought  it 
better  to  suppress  such  instances,  as  not  possessing  that 
force  of  evidence  which  entitles  them  to  a  place  in  these 
pages  ;  as  for  the  same  reason  I  drew  no  contingent  to  my 
argument  from  a  comparison  between  the  Psalms  and  the 
Books  of  Samuel ;  for  though  many  of  the  Psalms  concur 
very  well  with  the  circumstances  in  which  David  is  repre- 
sented to  have  been  actually  placed  from  time  to  time,  in 
the  Books  of  Samuel ;  and  though  the  Psalms  are  often 
headed  with  a  notice  that  this  was  written  when  he  wras 
flying  before  Saul,  and  that  when  he  was  reproached  by 
Nathan ;  yet  the  internal  testimony  is  not  so  strong  as  to 
carry  conviction  along  with  it,  of  such  being  really  the  case ; 
and  this  failing,  it  is  folly  to  weaken  a  sound  argument  by 
a  fanciful  extension  of  it. 


THE   VERACITY 


OF   THE 


GOSPELS    AND    ACTS. 


PART  IV. 

I  now  proceed  to  apply  the  same  test  of  truth,  the  test 
of  coincidence  without  design,  which  the  Scriptures  of  the 
Old  Testament  have  sustained  so  satisfactorily,  to  the 
Gospels  and  Acts  of  the  Apostles ;  and  I  am  pleased  that 
my  first  coincidence  in  order  happens  to  be  one  of  the 
class  where  a  miracle  is  involved  in  the  coincidence. 


In  the  fourth  chapter  of  St.  Matthew  we  read  thus: — 
"  And  Jesus  walking  by  the  sea  of  Galilee,  saw  two 
brethren,  Simon  called  Peter,  and  Andrew  his  brother, 
casting  a  net  into  the  sea ;  for  they  were  fishers.  And 
he  saith  unlo  them,  Follow  me,  and  I  will  make  you 
fishers  of  men.  And  they  straightway  left  their  nets, 
and  followed  him.  And  going  on  from  thence,  he 
saw  other  two  brethren.  James  the  son  of  Zcbedee, 
and  John  his  brother,  in  a  ship  with  Zebedee  their 


PART    IV.  THE    GOSPELS    AND    ACTS.  255 

father,  mending   their   nets ;    and  he  called  them. 

And  they  immediately  left  the  ship  and  their  father, 

and  followed  him." 
Now  let  us  compare  this  with  the  fifth  chapter  of  St.  Luke. 
"And  it  came  to  pass,  that,  as  the  people  pressed  upon  him 
to  hear  the  Word  of  God,  he  stood  by  the  lake  of  Gennes- 
aret,  and  saw  two  ships  standing-  by  the  lake,  but  the 
fishermen  were  gone  out  of  them,  and  were  washing  their 
nets.  And  he  entered  into  one  of  the  ships,  which  was 
Simon's,  and  prayed  him  that  he  would  thrust  out  a  little 
from  the  land.  And  he  sat  down,  and  taught  the  people 
out  of  the  ship.  Now  when  he  had  left  speaking,  he  said 
unto  Simon,  launch  out  into  the  deep,  and  let  down  your 
nets  for  a  draught.  And  Simon  answering  said  unto  him, 
Master,  we  have  toiled  all  the  night,  and  taken  nothing ; 
nevertheless  at  thy  word  I  will  let  down  the  net.  And 
when  they  had  this  done,  they  enclosed  a  great  multitude 
of  fishes,  and  their  net  brake  ;  and  they  beckoned  to  their 
partners  which  were  in  the  other  ship,  that  they  should 
come  and  help  them  ;  and  they  came,  and  filled  both  the 
ships,  so  that  they  began  to  sink.  When  Simon  Peter 
saw  it,  he  fell  down  at  Jesus'  knees,  saying,  Depart  from 
me,  for  I  am  a  sinful  man,  O  Lord.  For  he  was  aston- 
ished, and  all  that  were  with  him,  at  the  draught  of  the 
fishes  which  they  had  taken ;  and  so  was  also  James,  and 
John,  the  sons  of  Zebedee,  which  were  partners  with 
Simon.  And  Jesus  said  unto  Simon,  Fear  not;  from 
henceforth  thou  shalt  catch  men.  And  when  they  had 
brought  their  ships  to  land,  they  forsook  all,  and  followed 
him.'' 

The  narrative  of  St.  Luke  may  be  reckoned  the  supple- 
ment to  that  of  St.  Matthew ;  for  that  both  relate  to  the 
same  event  I  think  indisputable.  In  both  we  are  told  of 
the  circumstances  under  which  Andrew,  Peter,  James,  and 


256  THE    VERACITY   OF   THE  PART  IV. 

John,  became  the  decided  followers  of  Christ ;  in  both 
they  are  called  to  attend  him  in  the  same  terms,  and  those 
remarkable  and  technical  terms  ;  in  both  the  scene  is  the 
same,  the  grouping  of  the  parties  the  same,  and  the  obedi- 
ence to  the  summons  the  same.  By  comparing  the  two 
Evangelists,  the  history  may  be  thus  completed : — Jesus 
teaches  the  people  out  of  Peter's  boat,  to  avoid  the  press  ; 
the  boat  of  Zebedee  and  his  sons,  meanwhile,  standing  by 
the  lake  a  little  further  on.  The  sermon  ended,  Jesus 
orders  Peter  to  thrust  out,  and  the  miraculous  draught  of 
fishes  ensues.  Peter's  boat  not  sufficing  for  the  fish,  he 
beckons  to  his  partners,  Zebedee  and  his  companions,  who 
were  in  the  other  ship.  The  vessels  are  both  filled  and 
pulled  to  the  shore ;  and  now  Jesus,  having  convinced 
Peter  and  Andrew  by  his  preaching  and  the  miracle  which 
he  had  wrought,  gives  them  the  call.  He  then  goes  on  to 
Zebedee  and  his  sons,  who  having  brought  their  boat  to 
land  were  mending  their  nets,  and  calls  them.  Such  is 
the  whole  transaction,  not  to  be  gathered  from  one,  but 
from  both  the  Evangelists.  The  circumstance  to  be  re- 
marked, therefore,  is  this  :  that  of  the  miracle,  St.  Matthew 
says  not  a  single  word ;  nevertheless,  he  tells  us,  that 
Zebedee  and  his  sons  were  found  by  our  Lord,  when  he 
gave  them  the  call,  "  mending  their  ?iets."  How  it  hap- 
pened that  the  nets  wanted  mending  he  does  not  think  it 
needful  to  state,  nor  should  we  have  thought  it  needful  to 
inquire,  but  it  is  impossible  not  to  observe,  that  it  perfectly 
harmonizes  with  the  incident  mentioned  by  St.  Luke,  that 
in  the  miraculous  draught  of  fishes  the  nets  brake.  This 
coincidence,  slight  as  it  is,  seems  to  me  to  bear  upon  the 
truth  of  the  miracle  itself.  For  the  "  mending  of  the  nets," 
asserted  by  one  Evangelist,  gives  probability  to  the  "  break- 
ing of  the  nets,''  mentioned  by  the  other — the  breaking  of 
the  nets  gives  probability  to  the  large  draught  of  fishes — 


PART    IV.  GOSPELS    AND    ACTS.  257 

the  large  draught  of  fishes  gives  probability  to  the  miracle. 
I  do  not  mean  that  the  coincidence  proves  the  miracle,  but 
that  it  marks  an  attention  to  truth  in  the  Evangelists  ;  for 
it  surely  would  be  an  extravagant  refinement  to  suppose, 
that  St.  Matthew  designedly  lets  fall  the  fact  of  the  mend- 
ing of  the  nets,  whilst  lie  suppresses  the  miracle,  in  order 
to  confirm  the  credit  of  St.  Luke,  who,  in  relating  the 
miracle,  says,  that  through  it  the  nets  brake.1 

1  The  indentity  of  the  event  here  recorded  by  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Luke 
is  questioned,  and  upon  the"  following  grounds. 

1.  In  St.  Matthew,  "Jesus  walks  by  the  sea  of  Galilee."  In  St.  Luke 
"the  people  press  upon  him  to  hear  the  word  as  he  stood  by  the  lake.'' 
The  quiet  walk  has,  nothing  in  common  with  the  press  of  the  multitude 
But  how  do  we  know  that  the  walk  was  a  quiet  one?  It  is  not  indeed 
asserted  that.1t  was  otherwise,  but  the  omission  of  a  fact  is  not  the  negation 
of  it.  Nobody  would  suppose,  from  St.  John's  account  of  the  crucitivion 
that  nature  was  otherwise  than  perfectly  still ;  yet  there  was  an  earthquake' 
and  rending  of  rocks,  and  darkness  over  all  the  land. 

2.  In  St.  Matthew,  "Jesus  saw  two  brethren,  Simon  and  Andrew,"  and 
addressed  them  both,  "Follow  me."  In  St.  Mark,  (i.  17,  who  certainly 
desenbes  the  same  incident  as  St.  Matthew,)  he  says,  "  Come  ye  "  In  St 
Luke,  Simon  only  is  named;  and  "  Launch  out,"  (Mv&yaye)  is  in  the  sin- 
gular. But  though  Simon  alone  is  named,  it  is  evident  that  there  was  some 
other  person  with  him  in  the  boat ;  for  no  sooner  is  it  needful  to  let  down 
the  nets  (an  operation  which  probably  required  more  than  one  pair  of 
hands)  than  the  number  becomes  plural  (Xa\«*are).  Who  the  coadjutor 
was,  is  not  hinted  at;  but  it  strikes  me  that  there  is  a  coincidence,  and  not 
an  idle  one,  between  the  intimation  of  St.  Luke,  that  though  Simon  only  is 
named,  he  was  nevertheless  not  alone  in  the  boat,  and  the  direct  assertion 
of  St  Matthew  and  St.  Mark,  that  Andrew  was  with  him;  indeed  the 
plural  is  used  in  all  the  remainder  of  St.  Luke's  narrative-"  thev  inclosed" 
-"theybeckoned"-not  meaning  Jesus  and  Simon,  but  Simon"  and  some 
one  with  him,  as  is  manifest  from  Jesus  himself  saying,  "Let  p  down  the 
nets,"  for  so  the  translation  ought  to  Lave  run.  And  though  it  is  true  that 
in  St.  Luke  the  call  is  expressly  directed  to  Simon  alone,  »  Hum  shall  catch 
men,"  it  was  evidently  considered  to  apply  to  others;  fo,  «  Uusy  forsook  all 
and  followed  him;"  amongst  whom  Andrew  might  well  be  included. 

3  In  St.  Matthew,  Simon  and  Andrew  receive  one  call,  James  and  John 
another.  In  St.  Luke  one  call  serves  for  all.  Rut  where  the  two  calls 
were  to  the  same  effect,  and  so  nearly  at  the  same  time,  I  do  not  think  it  in- 


258 


THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    IV. 


Besides,  though  St.  Matthew  does  not  record  the  mirac- 
ulous draught,  yet  the  readiness  of  the  several  disciples 

consistent  with  the  nature  of  the  rapid  memoranda  of  an  Evangelist  to  com- 
bine them  into  one,  any  more  than  that  the  cure  of  the  two  blind  men  near 
Jericho  of  St.  Matthew,  should  be  comprised  in  the  cure  of  one  by  St.  Mark  ; 
for  the  identity  of  these  miracles,  in  spite  of  some  trilling  differences,  I  can- 
not doubt. 

4.  In  St.  Matthew,  James  and  John  are  leisurely  mending  their  nets.  la 
St.  Luke,  they  are  busily  engaged  in  helping  Simon.  But  to  draw  a  con- 
tradiction from  this,  it  is  necessary  to  show  first  of  all,  that  St.  Matthew  and 
St.  Luke  both  speak  to  the  same  instant  of  time.  The  mending  of  the  nets 
does  not  imply  that  they  had  not  been  helping  Simon,  nor  does  the  helping 
Simon  imply  that  they  would  not  presently  mend  their  nets. 

5.  It  is  further  objected  that,  if  the  mending  of  the  nets  of  St.  Matthew 
was  subsequent  to  the  breaking  of  the  nets  of  St.  Luket  or  the  miraculous 
draught,  Simon  and  Andrew  casting  their  nets  into  the  sea  was  also  subse- 
quent to  it,  for  that  v.  18  and  v.  21  (Matt,  iv.)  relate  to  events  all  but  simul- 
taneous. It  may  be  so,  for  my  impression  is,  that  when  Simon  and  Andrew 
cast  their  net  into  the  sea,  it  was  for  the  purpose  of  washing  the  net  after  the 
fishing  was  over,  and  not  of  fishing:  PAMovtols  dfjupiPh'ioTpov  is  the  expres- 
sion, and  perhaps  plunging  the  net  would  be  the  better  translation;  and  I 
fe<  I  confirmed  in  this  by  the  fact  that,  whatever  the  operation  was,  it  was 

shore,  whilst  Jesus  was  talking  to  them  on 
the  land.  Whereas,  for  fishing,  it  was  necessary  to  move  out  to  sea: 
"  Launch  out  into  the  deep,"  says  our  Lord,  when  he  wants  them  to  let 
down  their  nets  for  a  draught. 

G.  It  is  said,  that  according  to  St.  Luke,  Simon's  net  brake,  and  that, 
ore,  Simon  and  his  companion  were  the  persons  to  mend  it ;  whereas, 
according  to  St.  Matthew,  Zebedee  and  his  sons  were  the  parties  employed. 
But  they  were  all  partners,  and  therefore  the  property  was,  probably,  com- 
jiiiin  property;  and  that  as  the  "hired  servants" Were  with  Zcbcdee  and 
his  sons  it  is  Dot  unlikely,  but  the  contrary,  that  the  labor  of  mending  the 
m  ts  would  i  ii  them,  (Mark  i.  20). 

7.  'i  ction  which  remains  i;.  that  a  comparison  of  St.  Mark.  i. 

23 — 39,  with  St.  Luke  iv.  31—44,  shows  the  call  in  St.  Mark  (which  is  cer- 
tainly that  of  St.  Matthew)  to  have  been  prior  to  the  call  in  St.  Luke.  So 
it  does,  if  St.  Luke  observi  a  Btrictly  the  ord<  rof  events  in  his  narrative ;  but 
I  e  no  sufficient  n  i  son  for  believing  that  what  is  n  lated  in  eh.  iv.  31 — 44, 
happened  I  •  fore  wh  t  is  n  I  '  3  in  ch.  v.  1 — 11.  In  the  former  passage  St. 
Lukn  tills  us  that  ae  down  to  i  t,  and  taught  them  on 

the  Sabbath  i  he  then  goes  on  to  mention  some  Sabbath-day  oc- 


PART    IV.  GOSPELS    AND    ACTS.  259 

en  this  occasion  to  follow  Jesus,  (a  thing  which  he  does 
record,)  agrees,  no  less  than  the  mending  of  the  nets,  with 
that  extraordinary  event ;  for  what  more  natural  than  that 
men  should  leave  all  for  a  master  whose  powers  were  so 
commanding? 


II. 

Hatth.  iv.  21.—"  And  going  on  from  thence,  he  saw  other 
two  brethren,  James  the  son  of  Zebedee,  and  John  his 
brother,  in  axship  with  Zebedee  their  Father P 

Ch,  viii.  21.— "And  another  of  his  disciples  said  unto  him, 
Lord,  suffer  me  first  to  go  and  bur//  my  father? 

Ch.  xx.  20.—-  Then  came  to  him  the  mother  of  Zebedee 's 
children,  with  her  sons,  worshipping  him,  and  desir- 
ing a  certain  thing  of  him." 

Ch.  xxvii.  55.  56.— '-'And  many  women  were  there,  behold- 

%       ing  afar  off,  which  followed  Jesus  from  Galilee,  min- 
istering unto  him.     Among  which  was  Mary  Magda- 
lene, and  Mary  the  mother  of  James  and  Joses,°and 
the  mother  of  Zebedee' s  children. 
When  the  coincidence  which  I  shall  found  upon  these 

currenees,  concluding  the  whole  "and  he  preached  in  the  synagogues  of 
Gahlee.      Tins  had  carried  him  too  much  in  mediae  res,  and  therefore  in 
ch.  v.  he  brings  up  so™  of  the  work-day  events,  which  a  wish  to  pursue 
;  iect  without  interruption  had  led  him  to  withhold  for  awhile 
though  ot  prior  d  tte.     And  only  let  us  observe  how  clumsily  the  narrative' 
would  proceed  upon  any  other  supposition-Jesus  call.  Andrew  and  Peter 
'  umes  and  K,hn.  as  he  was  walking  by  the  sea-side-then  he  goes  to  Caper- 
*fk  I'  tar's  wife's  mother,  performs  other  cures,  and  retires  to  a 
soh toy  pl«ce  (Mark  i.  1&-36).     Then,  supposing  St.  Luke  here  to  take 
up  .he  parable,  (ch.  iv.  43j  he  goes  again  to  the  sea-side,  and  a^ain  calls 
Pe tor.  ,        8,  and  John  ;  wtach  would  surely  be  one  call  too  much. 
I  doubt  not,  therefore,  the  identity  of  the  events  described. 


260  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    IV. 

passages  first  occurred  to  me,  I  felt  some  doubt  whether, 
by  producing  it,  I  might  not  subject  myself  to  a  charge  of 
over-refinement.  On  further  consideration,  however,  I  am 
satisfied  that  the  conjecture  I  hazard  (for  it  is  nothing  more) 
is  far  from  improbable  ;  and  I  am  the  less  disposed  to  with- 
hold it  from  having  observed,  when  I  have  chanced  to  dis- 
cuss any  of  these  paragraphs  with  my  friends,  how  differ- 
ently the  importance  of  an  argument  is  estimated  by  differ- 
ent minds ;  a  point  of  evidence  often  inducing  conviction 
in  one,  which  another  would  find  almost  nugatory. 

Whoever  reads  the  four  verses  which  1  have  given  at 
the  head  of  this  number  in  juxtaposition,  will  probably  an- 
ticipate what  I  have  to  say.  The  coincidence  here  is  not 
between  several  writers,  but  between  several  detached  pas- 
sages of  the  same  writer.  From  the  first  of  these  verses  it 
appears  that,  at  the  period  when  James  and  John  received 
the  call  to  follow  Christ,  Zebedec  their  father  was  alive. 
They  obeyed  the  call,  and  left  him.  From  the  last  two 
verses  it  appears,  in  my  opinion,  that,  at  a  subsequent  pe- 
riod of  which  they  treat,  Zebedee  was  dead.  Zebedee 
does  not  make  the  application  to  Christ  on  behalf  of  his 
sons,  but  the  mother  of  Zebedee's  children  makes  it. 
Zebedee  is  not  at  the  crucifixion,  but  the  mother  of  Zebe- 
dee's cldldrcn.  It  is  not  from  his  absence  on  these  occa- 
sions that  I  so  much  infer  his  death,  as  from  the  expression 
applied  to  Salome  ;  she  is  not  called  the  wife  of  Zebedee, 
she  is  not  called  the  mother  of  James  and  John,  hut  the 
mother  of  Zebedee's  children.  The  term,  I  think,  implies 
that  she  was  a  widow. 

Now  from  the  second  verse,  which  relates  to  a  period 
between  these  tiro,  we  learn  that  one  of  Jesus'  disciples 
asked  him  permission  '•'•to  go  and  bury  Jus  father.''''  The 
interval  was  a  short  one ;  the  number  of  persons  to  whom 
the  name  of  disciple  was  given,  was  very  small  (see  Matt. 


PART    IV.  GOSPELS    AND    ACTS.  261 

ix.  37) ;  a  single  boat  seems  to  have  contained  them  all 
(viii.  23).  In  that  number  we  know  that  the  sons  of  Zeb- 
edee  were  included.  My  inference,  therefore,  is,  that  the 
death  of  Zebedee  is  here  alluded  to,  and  that  St.  Matthew, 
without  a  wish,  perhaps,  or  thought,  either  to  conceal  or 
express  the  individual,  (for  there  seems  no  assignable  mo- 
tive for  his  studying  to  do  either.)  betrays  an  event  familiar 
to  his  own  mind,  in  that  inadvertent  and  unobtrusive  man- 
ner in  which  the  truth  so  often  comes  out. 

The  data,  it  must  be  confessed,  are  not  enough  to  deter- 
mine the  matter  with  certainty  either  way ;  it  is  a  conjec- 
tural coincidence.  They  who  are  not  satisfied  with  it  may 
pass  it  over:  I  am  persuaded,  however,  that  nothing  is 
wanted  but  the  discovery  of  a  fifth  or  sixth  Gospel  to  mul- 
tiply such  proofs  of  veracity  as  these  I  am  collecting  to  a 
great  extent.  It  is  impossible  to  examine  the  historical 
parts  of  tlie  New  Testament  in  detail,  without  suspicions 
constantly  arising  of  facts,  which,  nevertheless,  cannot  be 
substantiated  for  want  of  documents.  We  have  very  often 
a  glimpse,  and  no  more.  A  hint  is  dropped  relating  to 
something  well  known  at  the  time,  and  which  is  not  with- 
out its  value  even  now  in  evidence,  by  giving  us  to  under- 
stand that  it  is  a  fragment  of  some  real  story,  of  which  we 
are  not  in  full  possession.  Of  this  nature  is  the  circum- 
stance recorded  by  St.  Mark.  (xiv.  51,)  that  when  the  dis- 
ciples forsook  Jesus,  "  there  followed  him  a  certain  young 
man,  having  a  linen  cloth  cast  about  his  naked  body,  and 
the  young  men  laid  hold  of  him  ;  and  he  left  the  linen 
cloth,  and  fled  from  them  naked."  This  is  evidently  an 
imperfect  history.  It  is  an  incident  altogether  detached, 
and  alone  :  another  Gospel  might  give  us  the  supplement, 
and  together  with  that  supplement  indications  of  its  truth. 
As  another  example  of  the  same  kind,  may  be  mentioned 
an  expression  in  the  beginmng  of  the  second  chapter  of 


262 


THE    VERACITY   OF    THE  PART  IV. 


the  Gospel  of  St.  John,  "  and  the  third  day  there  was  a 
marriage  in  Cana  of  Galilee"  (ver.  i.) ;  the  Apostle  clearly 
having  some  other  event  in  his  mind  which  does  not  tran- 
spire, from  which  this  third  day  dates.  Meanwhile  let  us 
but  apply  ourselves  diligently  to  comparing  together  the 
four  witnesses  which  we  have,  instead  of  indulging  a  fruit- 
less desire  for  more,  and  if  consistency  without  design  be  a 
proof  that  they  are  <:  true  men,"  I  cannot  but  consider  that 
it  is  abundantly  supplied. 


Ill 


Matth.  viii.  14 — "  And  when  Jesus  was  come  into  Peter's 
house,  he  saw  his  wife's  mother  laid,  and  sick  of  a 
fever." 

The  coincidence  which  I  have  here  to  mention  does 
not  strictly  fall  within  my  plan,  for  it  results  from  a  com- 
parison of  St.  Matthew  with  St.  Paul ;  if,  however,  it  be 
thought  of  any  value,  the  irregularity  of  its  introduction 
will  be  easily  overlooked . 

In  this  passage  of  the  Evangelist,  then,  by  the  merest 
accident  in  the  world,  we  discover  that  Peter  was  a  mar- 
ried man.  It  is  a  circumstance  that  has  nothing  what- 
ever to  do  with  the  narrative,  but  is  a  gratuitous  piece  of 
information,  conveyed  incidentally  in  the  designation  of 
an  individual  who  was  the  subject  of  a  miracle. 

But  that  Peter  actually  was  a  married  man,  we  learn 
from  the  independent  testimony  of  St.  Paul:  "  Have  we 
not  power,"  says  he,  ':  to  lead  about  a  sister,  a  wife,  as  well 
as  other  apostles,  and  as  the  brethren  of  the  Lord  and 
Cephas  ?"  1  Cor.  ix.  5.  Where  it  may  be  remarked  that 
the  difference  in  name,  Cephas  in  the  one  passage,  Peter 
in  the  other,,  is  in  itself  an  argument  that  the  one  passage 


PART    IV.  GOSPELS    AND    ACTS.  263 

was  written  without  any  reference  to  the  other — that  the 
coincidence  was  without  design.  Here  again,  be  it  ob- 
served, as  in  the  former  instance,  the  indication  of  veracity 
in  the  Apostle's  narrative,  is  found  where  the  subject  of 
the  narrative  is  a  miracle  ;  for  Christ  having  ';  touched  her 
hand,  the  fever  left  her,  and  she  arose  and  ministered  unto 
them,"  (ver.  15.) 

I  cannot  but  think  that  any  candid  sceptic  would  con- 
sider this  coincidence  to  be  at  least  decisive  of  the  actual 
existence  of  such  a  woman  as  Peter's  wife's  mother  ;  of 
its  being  no  imaginary  character,  no  mere  person  of  straw, 
introduced  with  an  air  of  precision,  under  the  view  of  giving 
a  color  of  truth  to  the  miracle.  Yet,  unless  the  Evan- 
gelist had  felt  quite  sure  of  his  ground,  quite  sure,  J  mean, 
that  this  remarkable  cure  would  bear  examination,  it  is 
scarcely  to  be  believed  that  he  would  have  fixed  it  upon 
an  individual  who  certainly  did  live,  or  had  lived,  and  who 
therefore  might  herself,  or  her  friends  might  for  her,  con- 
tradict the  alleged  fact,  if  it  never  had  occurred. 


IV 


Matt.  viii.  1G. — "  When  the  even  was  come,  they  brought 
unto  him  many  that  were  possessed  with  devils  ;  and 
he  cast  out  the  spirits  with  his  word,  and  healed  all 
that  were  sick." 
The  undesignedness  of  many  passages  in  the  Gospels 
is  overlooked   in  our  familiar  acquaintance   with    them. 
They  have  been  so  long  the  subject  of  our  reading  and  of 
our  reflection,  that  the  evidence  they  furnish  of  their  own 
veracity  does  not  always  present  itself  to  us  with  that  fresh- 
ness which  is  necessary  to  give  it  its  due  effect.     We  often, 
no  doubt,  fill  up  an  ellipsis  and  complete  a  meaning  almost 


264 


THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    IV. 


instinctively,  without  being  aware  how  strongly  the  neces- 
sity for  doing  this,  marks  the  absence  of  all  caution,  con- 
trivance, and  circumspection"  in  the  writers.  For  instance, 
why  did  they  bring  the  sick  and  possessed  to  Jesus  when 
the  even  was  come  ?  I  turn  to  the  parallel  passages  of  St. 
Mark  (i.  24)  and  St.  Luke  (iv.  31),  and  find  that  the  trans- 
action in  question  took  place  on  the  Sabbath-day.  I  turn 
to  another  passage  in  St.  Matthew,  (xii.  10,)  wholly  inde- 
pendent, however,  of  the  former,  and  find  that  there  was 
a  superstition  amongst  the  Jews  that  it  "  was  not  lawful  to 
heal  on  the  Sabbath-day."  I  put  these  together,  and  at 
once  see  the  reason  why  no  application  for  a  cure  was 
made  to  Jesus  till  the  Sabbath  was  past,  or  in  other  words, 
till  the  even  was  come.  But  St.  Matthew,  meanwhile, 
does  not  offer  one  syllable  in  explanation.  He  states  the 
naked  fact — that  when  the  even  was  come  people  were 
brought  to  be  healed  ;  and,  for  aught  that  appears  to  the 
contrary,  it  might  have  been  any  other  day  of  the  week. 
Suppose  it  had  happened  that  St.  Matthew's  Gospel  had 
been  the  only  one  which  had  descended  to  us,  the  value 
of  these  few  words,  "  when  the  even  was  come"  would 
have  been  quite  lost  as  an  argument  for  the  veracity  of  his 
story  ;  for  how  could  it  have  been  conjectured  that  the 
thought  which  was  influencing  St.  Matthew's  mind  at  the 
moment  when  they  escaped  him,  was  this,  that  these  things 
were  done  on  the  evening  of  a  Sabbath-day  ?  There  is 
no  one  circumstance  in  the  previous  narrative  of  the  events 
of  that  day  as  given  by  this  Evangelist,  to  point  to  such  a 
conclusion.  Jesus  had  entered  into  Capernaum— he  had 
healed  the  centurion's  servant — he  had  healed  Peter's 
wife's  mother  of  a  fever—  how  oould  it.  lie  known  from  any 
of  these  acts  that  the  day  was  the  Sabbath  ?  Or  suppose 
we  had  been  in  possession  of  the  other  three  Evangelists, 
but  that  the  Gospel  of  St.  Matthew  had  just  been  dis- 


PART    IV.  GOSPELS    AND    ACTS-  265 

covered  among  the  manuscripts  of  Milan,  I  ask  whether 
such  an  argument  as  this  would  not  have  had  much  weight 
in  establishing  its  authority  ?  • 

I  am  not  concerned  about  the  perfect  intelligibility  of» 
this  passage  in  St.  Matthew.  Its  meaning  is  obvious,  and 
it  would  be  a  waste  of  words  to  oiler  what  I  have  done,  as 
commentary — all  that  1  am  anxious  to  do,  is  to  point  out 
the  undesignedness  apparent  in  it,  which  is  such,  I  think, 
as  a  writer  of  an  imaginary  narrative  could  not  possibly 
have  displayed. 


V. 

Matth.  ix.  9,  10. — "  And  as  Jesus  passed  forth  from  thence, 
he  saw  a  man,  named  Matthew,  sitting  at  the  receipt 
of  custom  ;  and  he  saith  unto  him,  Follow  me  ;  and 
he  arose  and  followed  him.     And  it  came  to  pass,  as 
Jesus  sat  at  meat  in  tkt  house?  behold,  many  publi- 
cans and  sinners  came  and  sat  down  with  him.*' 
How  natural  for  a  man,  speaking  of  a  transaction  which 
concerned  himself,  to  forget  for  a  moment  the  character  of 
the  historian,  and  to  talk  of  Jesus  sitting  down  in  the  house, 
without  telling  his  readers  whose  house  it  was  !     How  nat- 
ural for  him  not  to  perceive  that  there  was  vagueness  and 
obscurity  in  a  term,   which   to   himself  was  definite  and 
plain  !     Accordingly  we  find  St.  Mark  and  St.  Luke,  who 
deal  with  the  same  incident  as  historians,  not  as  principals, 
using  a  different  form  of  expression.     "  And  as  they  passed 
by,"  says  St.  Mark,  «  he  saw  Levi  the  son  of  Alpheus  sit- 
ting at  the  receipt  of  custom,  and  said  unto  him,  Follow 

1  bt  t'j  oUia.    I  do  not  observe  that  Bishop  Middleton  notices  this  instance 
cf  the  definite  use  of  the  Article. 

23 


266  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART.    IV. 

me  :  and  he  arose  and  followed  him.     And  it  came  to  pass, 
that  as  Jesus  sat  at  meat  in  his-  house."    (ii.  15.) 

"  And  Levi/'  says  St.  Luke,  "  made  liiin  a  great  feast  in 
his  own  house."    (v.  29.) 

It  may  be  further  remarked,  that  a  Dumber  of  pubU- 
cans  sat  down  with  Jesus  and  his  disciples  upon  this  oc- 
casion ;  a  fact  for  which  no  reason  is  assigned,  but  for 
which  we  discover  a  very  good  reason  in  the  occupation 
which  St.  Matthew  had  followed. 

I  think  the  odds  are  very  great  against  the  probability 
of  a  writer  preserving  consistency  in  trifles  like  these,  were 
he  only  devising  a  story.  I  can  scarcely  imagine  that 
such  a  person  would  hit  upon  the  phrase  ':  in  the  house," 
as  an  artful  way  of  suggesting  that  the  house  was  in  fact 
his  own,  and  himself  an  eye-witness  of  the  scene  he  de- 
scribed ;  still  less,  that  he  would  refine  yet  further,  and* 
make  the  company  assembled  there  to  consist  of  publicans, 
in  order  that  the  whole  picture  might  be  complete  and  har- 
monious. It  may  he  added,  that  Capernaum,  which  was 
the  scene  of  St.  Matthew's  call,  was  precisely  the  place 
where  we  might  expect  to  meet  with  a  man  of  his  voca- 
tion—it being  a  station  where  such  merchandise  as  was  to 
be  conveyed  by  water-carriage,  along  the  Jordan  south- 
wards, might  he  very  conveniently  shipped,,  and  where  a 
custom-bouse  would  consequently  be  established.  There 
is  a  similar  propriety  in  the  habitat  of  Zaccheus  (Luke  xix. 
2);  he  was  a  '-chief  among  the  publicans,"  and  Jesus  is 
said  to  have  fallen  in  with  him  near  Jericho.  Now  Jericho 
was  the  centre  of  the  growth,  preparation,  and  export,  of 
balsam,  a  very  considerable  branch  of  trade  in  Judea  ;  and 
therefore  a  town  which  invited  the  presence  of  the  tax- 
gatherers.  These  are  small  matters,  but  such  as  bespeak 
truth  in  those  who  detail  them. 


PART    IV.  GOSPELS    AND    ACTS.  267 


VI. 


Akin  to  this  is  my  next  instance1  of  consistency  without 
design. 

Matth.  x.  2. — "  Now  the  names  of  the  twelve  Apostles  are 
these  :  the  first,  Simon,  who  is  called  Peter,  and  An- 
drew his  brother ;  James,  the  son  of  Zebedee,  and 
John  his  brother ;  Philip,  and  Bartholomew  ;  Thomas. 
and  Matthew  the  publican ;  James,  the  son  of  Al- 
pheus,  and  Lebbeus,  whose  surname  was  Thaddeus  ; 
Simon  the  Canaanite,  and  Judas  Iscariot,  who  also 
betrayed  him." 
This  order,  as  far  as  regards  Thomas  and  Matthew,  is 
inverted  in  St.  Mark  and  St.  Luke.     "  Philip  and  Barthol- 
omew, and  Matthew  and  Thomas"  is  the  succession  of 
the  names  in  those  two  Evangelists,   (Mark  iii.  IS;  Luke 
vi.  15  ;)  and  by  neither  of  them  is  the  odious,  but  distinc- 
tive, appellation  of  "  the  publican""  added.     This  difference, 
however,  in  St.  Matthew's  catalogue,  from  that  given  by 
St.  Mark  and  St.  Luke,  is  precisely  such  as  might  be  ex- 
pected from  a  modest  man  when  telling  his  own  tale :  he 
places  his  own  name  after  that  of  a  colleague  who  had  no 
claims  to  precedence,  but  rather  the  contrary,  and',  fearful 
that  its  obscurity  might  render  it  insufficient  merely  to  an- 
nounce it,  and,  at  the  same  time,  perhaps,  not  unwilling  to 
inflict  upon  himself  an  act  of  self-humiliation,  he  annexes 
to  it  his  former  calling,  which  was  notorious  at  least,  how- 
ever it  might  be  unpopular.     I  should  not  be  disposed  to 
lay  great  stress  upon  this  example  of  undesigned  consist- 
ency were  it  a  solitary  instance,  but  when  taken  in  con- 

1  In  this  argument  I  am  indebted  to  Nelson,  (Festivals  and  Fasts,  p.  229,) 
who  advances  it,  however,  for  a  different  end,  to  prove  the  humility,  not  the 
veracity,  of  St.  Matthew. 


26S 


THE    VERACITY    OP    THE  PART    IV. 


junction  with  so  many  others,  it  may  be  allowed  a  place ; 
for  though  the  order  of  names  and  the  annexed  epithet 
might  be  accidental,  yet  it  must  be  admitted  that  they 
would  be  accounted  for  at  least  as  well  by  the  veracity  of 
the  narrative. 


VII. 

Matth.  xii.  46. — "  While  he  yet  talked,  behold,  his  mother 
and  his  brethren  stood  without,  desiring  to  speak 
with  him." 
What  his  mother's  communication  might  be  the  Evan- 
gelist does  not  record.  It  seems  to  have  been  made  pri- 
vately and  apart,  and  was  probably  not  overheard  by  any 
of  his  followers.  Bat,  in  the  next  chapter,  St.  Matthew 
very  undesignedly  mentions,  that  "  when  he  was  come  into 
his  own  country,  he  taught  them  in  the  synagogue," 
(xiii.  54).  Hence  then  we  see,  that,  the  interview  with  his 
mother  and  brethren  was  shortly  succeeded  by  a  visit  to 
their  town.  The  visit  might,  indeed,  have  nothing  to  do 
with  the  interview,  nor  does  St.  Matthew  hint  that  it  had 
anything  whatever  to  do  with  it,  (for  then  no  argument  of 
veracity,  founded  upon  the  undesigned  coincidence  of  the 
two  facts,  could  have  been  here  advanced,)  but  still  there 
is  a  fair  presumption  that  the  visit  was  in  obedience  to  his 
mother's  wish,  more  especially  as  the  disposition  of  the  in- 
habitants of  Nazareth,  which  must  have  been  known  to 
Christ,  was  unfit  for  his  doing  there  any  mighty  works. 


VIII. 

The  death  of  Joseph  is  nowhere  either  mentioned,  or 
alluded  to,  by  the  Evangelists  ;  yet,  from  all  four  of  them 


PART    IV.  GOSPELS    AND   ACTS.  269 

it  may  be  indirectly  inferred  to  have  hajypened  ichilst 
Christ  was  yet  alive  ;  a  circumstance  in  which,  had  they 
been  imposing  a  story  upon  us,  they  would  scarcely  have 
concurred,  when  the  concurrence  is  manifestly  not  the 
effect  of  scheme  or  contrivance.  Thus  in  the  passage  front 
St.  Matthew,  quoted  in  the  last  paragraph,  we  find  hia 
mother  and  brethren  seeking  Jesus,  but  not  his  reputed 
father.  In  St.  Mark  we  have  the  whole  family  enumerated, 
but  no  mention  made  of  Joseph.  "  Is  not  this  the  carpenter, 
the  son  of  Mary,  the  brother  of  James,  and  Joses,  and  of 
Juda,  and  Simon  ?  and  are  not  his  sisters  here  with  us  ?" 
(vi.  3.) 

"Then  came  to  him,"  says  St.  Luke,  "his  mother  and 
his  brethren,  and  could  not  come  at  him  for  the  press," 
(viii.  19.)  "After  this,"  says  St.  John,  "he  went  down  to 
Capernaum  ;  he,  and  his  mother,  and  his  brethren,  and  his 
disciples."  (ii.  12.) 

Neither  do  we  meet  with  any  notice  of  Joseph's  attend- 
ance at  the  feast  of  Cana,  or  at  the  Crucifixion ;  indeed,  in 
his  last  moments  Jesus  commends  his  mother  to  the  care 
of  the  disciple  whom  he  loved,  and  that  "  disciple  took  her 
to  his  own  home." 

Such  a  harmony  as  this  cannot  have  been  the  effect  of 
concert.  It  is  not  a  direct,  or  even  an  incidental  agree- 
ment in  a  positive  fact,  for  nothing  is  asserted :  but  yet, 
from  the  absence  of  assertion,  a  presumption  of  such  fact 
is  conveyed  to  us  by  the  separate  narrative  of  each  of  the 
Evangelists. 


23* 


270  THE    VERACITY   OP    THE  PART    IV. 


IX. 

Matth.  xiii.  2. — "And  great  multitudes  were  gathered  to- 
gether unto  him,  so  that  he  went  into  a  ship,  (eig  to 
nXoiop),  and  sat." 
*  In  this,  and  in  some  other  places  of  the  Evangelists/ 
says  Bishop  Middleton,  '  we  have  nloiov  with  the  article 
{the  ship,  not  a  ship) ;  the  force  of  which,  however,  is  not 
immediately  obvious.     In  the  present  instance  the  English 
version,  Newcoine,  and  Campbell,  understand  to  nXotov  in- 
definitely ;  but  that  any  ship,  without  reference,  can  be 
meant  by  this  phrase,  is  grammatically  impossible.     Many 
philologists,  indeed,  have  adduced   this  passage  amongst 
others,  to  show  that  this  article  is  sometimes  without,  mean- 
ing ;  but  this  proves  only  that  its  meaning  was  sometimes 
unknown  to  them. 

'  Mr.  Wakefield  observes,  in  his  New  Testament,  "a  par- 
ticular vessel  is  uniformly  specified.  It  seems  to  have  been 
kept  on  the  lake  for  the  use  of  Jesus  and  his  apostles.  It 
probably  belonged  to  some  of  the  fishermen  (Luke  iv.  22) 
who,  I  should  think,  occasionally  at  least,  continued  to  fol- 
low their  former  occupation.  See  John  xxi.  3."  Thus  far 
Mr.  Wakefield,  whose  solution  carried  with  it  an  air  of 
strong  probability":  and  when  we  look  at  Mark  iii.9,  which 
appears  to  have  escaped  him,  this  conjecture  becomes  ab- 
solute certainty.  "And  he  spake  to  his  disciples  that  a 
small  vessel  should  wait  on  him."  (constantly  be  wait- 
ing on  him,  TtQoaxaQTt^  otirw)  because  of  the  multitude,  lest 
they  should  throng  him.  Moreover,  !  think  we  may  dis- 
cover to  whom  the  vessel  belonged.  In  one  Evangelist, 
(Luke  v.  3,)  we  find  a  ship  used  by  our  Saviour  for  the 
very  purpose  here  mentioned,  declared  expressly  to  be 
Simon's ;  and  afterwards,  in  the  same  Evangelist,  (viii.  22.) 


PART  IV.         GOSPELS  AND  ACTS.  271 

we  have  the  ship,  to  nloiov,  definitely,  as  if  it  were  intended 
that  the  reader  should  understand  it  of  the  ship  already 
spoken  of.  It  is  therefore  not  improbable  that  in  the  other 
Evangelists  also,  the  vessel  so  frequently  used  by  our  Sav- 
iour was  that  belonging  to  Peter  and  Andrew.'1  Where 
Bishop  Middleton  finds  a  philological  solution,  I  find  an 
undesigned  coincidence.  St.  Matthew  speaks  of  "  the  ship" 
(id  nloiov)  into  which  Jesus  went,  as  though  referring  to  a 
well-known  vessel.  St.  Mark  tells  us  that  he  had  "  a  small 
vessel  to  wait  on  him." 


X 


Matth.  xiv.  1. — "At that  time  Herod  the  Tetrarch  heard 

of  the  fame  of  Jesus,  and  said  unto  his  servants,  (ro?s 

haialv  «i5ror,)  This  is  John  the  Baptist,  who  has  risen 

from  the  dead." 

St.  Matthew  here  declares  that  Herod  delivered  his 

opinion  of  Christ  to  his  servants.     There  must  have  been 

some  particular  reason,  one  would  imagine,  to  induce  him 

to  make  such  a  communication  to  them  above  all  other 

people.     What  could  it  have  been  ?     St.  Mark   does  not 

help  us  to  solve  the  question,  for  he  contents  himself  with 

recording  what  Herod  said.     Neither  does  St.  Luke,  in  the 

parallel  passage,  tell  us  to  whom  he  addressed  himself — 

"he  was  desirous  of  seeing  him,  because   he  had  heard 

many  things  of  hitn.n     By   referring,   however,   to    the 

eighth  chapter  of  this  last  Evangelist,  the  cause  why  Herod 

had  heard  so  much  about  Christ,  and  why  he  talked  to 

his  servants  about  him,  is  sufficiently  explained,  but  it  is 

by  the  merest  accident.     We   are   there   informed,  "that 

Jesus  went  throughout  every  city  and  village,  preaching 

(•  Bishop  Middleton  on  the  Greek  Article,  p.  158.) 


272  THE    VERACITY    OF    TEE  PART    IV. 

and  showing  the  glad  tidings  of  the  kingdom  of  God  ;  and 
the  twelve  were  with  him,  and  certain  women  who  had 
been  healed  of  evil  spirits  and  infirmities :  Mary,  called 
Magdalene,  out  of  whom  went  seven  devils;  and  Joanna 
the  wife  of  Chuza,  Herod's  steward,  and  Susanna,  and 
many  others,  which  ministered  unto  him  of  their  sub- 
stance." 

And  again,  in  chap.  xiii.  ver.  1,  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apos- 
tles, we  read,  amongst  other  distinguished  converts,  of 
"  Manaen,  which  had  been  brought  vp  with  Herod  the 
Tetrarch"  or,  in  other  words,  who  was  his  foster-brother. 
We  see,  therefore,  that  Christ  had  followers  from  amongst 
the  household  of  this  very  prince,  and,  accordingly,  that 
Herod  was  very  likely  to  discourse  with  his  servants  on  a 
subject  in  which  they  wrere  better  informed  than  himself. 


XI 


Matth.  xiv.  20. — In  the  miracle  of  feeding  the  five 
thousand  with  five  loaves  and  two  fishes,  recorded  by  all 
four  Evangelists,  the  disciples,  we  are  told,  took  up  dudexa 
y.otfivovg  nlion:  (Matth.  xiv.  20 ;  Mark  vi.  43  ;  Luke  ix. 
17;  John  vi.  13;)  in  all  these  cases  our  translation  ren- 
ders the  passage  "  twelve  baskets." 

In  the  miracle  of  feeding  the  four  thousand  with  seven 
loaves  and  a  few  small  fishes,  recorded  by  two  of  the  Evan- 
gelist.^ the  disciples  took  up  Imu  anvpi'dag  (Matth.  xv.  37; 
Mark  viii.  8 ;)  in  both  these  cases  our  translation  renders 
the  passages  "  seven  baskets  ;"  the  term  xoqcuoj,  and  onvqi; 
being  expressed  both  alike  by  "basket." 

Yet  there  was,  no  doubt,  a  marked  difference  between 
these  two  vessels,  whatever  that  difference  might  be,  for 
xoyiro;  is  invariably   used  when   (he   miracle  of  the  five 


PART    IV.  GOSPELS    AND    ACTS.  273 

thousand  is  spoken  of;  and  onvgls  is  invariably  used  when 
the  miracle  of  the  four  thousand  is  spoken  of.  Moreover 
such  distinction  is  clearly  suggested  to  us  in  Matth.  xvi.  9, 
10,  where  our  Saviour  cautions  bis  disciples  against  the 
"  leaven  of  the  Pharisees  and  Sadducees  ;"  and  in  so  doing-, 
alludes  to  each  of  these  miracles  thus  :  "  Do  ye  not  yet  un- 
derstand, neither  remember  the  five  loaves  oPthe^rc  thou- 
sand, and  how  many  baskets  (y-oyiiovi)  ye  took  up  .'  nei- 
ther the  seveu  loaves  of  \hefour  thousand,  and  how  many 
baskets  [a^voiSa;)  ye  took  up?"  though  here  again  the 
distinction  is  entirely  lost  in  our  translation,  both  KotpUovg 
and  anvoiSug  being  still  rendered  "  baskets,"  alike. 

The  precise  nature  of  the  difference  of  these  two  kinds 
of  baskets  it  may  be  difficult  to  determine;  and  the  lexicog- 
raphers and  commentators  do  not  enable  us  to  do  it  with 
accuracy  ;  though  from  the  word  otivqI;  being  used  (Acts 
ix.  25)  for  the  basket  in  which  St.  Paul  was  let  down  over 
the  wall,  wc  may  suppose  that  it  was  capacious  ;  whereas 
from  the  xoyiioi,  in  this  instance,  being  twelve  in  number, 
we  may  in  like  manner  suppose  that  they  were  the  provis- 
ion-baskets carried  by  the  twelve  disciples,  and  were,  con- 
sequently, smaller.  But  the  point  of  the  coincidence  is 
independent  of  the  precise  difference  of  the  vessels,  and 
consists  in  the  uniform  application  of  the  term  xocfm;  to 
the  basket  of  the  one  miracle  (wheresoever  and  by  whom- 
soever told  ;)  and  as  the  uniform  application  of  the  term 
ovn><><e,  to  the  basket  of  the  other  miracle;  such  uniform- 
ity marking  very  clearly  the  two  miracles  to  be  distinctly 
impressed  on  tin;  minds  of  the  Evangelists,  as  real  events  ; 
the  circumstantial  peculiarities  of  each  present  to  them,  as 
though  they  were  themselves  actual  eye-witnesses  :  or  at 
least  had  received  their  report  from  those  who  were  so. 

It  is  next  to  impossible  that  such  coincidences  in  both 
cases,  between  the  fragments  and  the  receptacles,  respec- 


274  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    IV. 

tively,  should  have  been  preserved  by  chance  ;  or  by  a 
teller  of  a  tale  at  third  or  fourth  hand ;  and  accordingly 
we  see  that  the  coincidences  is  in  fact  entirely  lost  by  our 
translators,  who  were  not,  witnesses  of  the  miracles  ;  and 
whose  attention  did  not  happen  to  be  drawn  to  the  point. 


XII. 

We  do  not  read  a  great  deal  respecting  Herod  the  Te- 
Irarch  in  the  Evangelists ;  but  all  that  is  said  of  him  will 
be  perceived,  on  examination,  (for  it  may  not  strike  us  at 
first  sight,)  to  be  perfectly  harmonious. 

When  the  disciples  had  forgotten  to  take  bread  with 
them  in  the  boat,  our  Lord  warns  them  to  "  take  heed  and 
beware  of  the  leaven  of  the  Pharisees,  and  of  the  leaven 
of  Herod.7'  So  says  St.  Mark,  (viii.  ]5).  The  charge 
which  Jesus  gives  them  on  this  occasion  is  thus  worded 
by  St.  Matthew,  "  Take  heed  and  beware  of  the  leaven  of 
the  Pharisees  and  of  the  Sadducees"  (xvi.  0).  The  obvious 
interference  to  be  drawn  from  the  two  passages  is,  that 
Herod  himself  was  a  Sadducee.  Let  us  turn  to  St.  Luke, 
and  though  still  we  find  no  assertion  to  this  effect,  he 
would  clearly  lead  us  to  the  same  conclusion.  Chap.  ix. 
7,  "Now  Herod  the  Tctrarch  heard  of  all  that  was  done 
by  him  ;  and  he  was  perplexed,  because  that  it  ivas  said  of 
some,  tint l  John  teas  risen  from  the  dead ;  and  of  some, 
that  Elias  had  appeared  ;  and  of  some,  that  one  of  the  old 
prophets  was  risen  again.  And  Herod  said,  John  have 
I  beheaded,  but  who  is  tins  of  whom  I  hear  such  things? 
and  he  desired  him." 

le  transmigration  of  the  souls  of  good  men  was  a  pop- 
ular belief  at  that  lime  amongst  the  Pharisees;  (sec  Jose- 
phus,  i>.  J.  ii.  S3,  14);  a  Pharisee,  therefore,  would  have 


PART    IV.  GOSPELS    AND    ACTS.  275 

found  little  difficulty  in  this  resurrection  of  John,  or  of  an 
old  prophet;  in  fact,  it  was  the  Pharisees,  no  doubt,  who 
started  the  idea :  not  so  Herod  ;  he  was  perplexed  about 
it;  he  had  "beheaded  John,"  which  was  in  his  creed  the 
termination  of  his  existence  ;  well  then  might  he  ask,  "  who 
is  this  of  whom  I  hear  such  things  ?"     Neither  do  I  discover 
any  objection  in  the  parallel  passage  of  St.  Matthew,  xiv. 
1 :  "  At  that  time  Herod  the  Tetrarch  heard  of  the  fame 
of  Jesus,  and  said  unto  his  servants,  This  is  John  the  Bap- 
tist; he  is  risen  from  the  dead  ;  and  therefore  mighty  works 
do  show  forth  themselves  in  him."     It  is  the  language  of  a 
man,  (especially  when  taken  in  connection  with  St.  Luke,) 
who  began  to  doubt  whether  he  was  right  in  his  Sadducean 
notions;  a  guilty  conscience  awaking  in  him  some  appre- 
hension that  he  whom  he  had  murdered  might  be  alive 
again— that   there   might,  after   all,  be  a  "resurrection, 
an  angel,  and  spirit." 


XIII. 

Matth.  xvii.  19.-"  Then  came  the  disciples  to  Jesus  apart, 
and  said,  Why  could  not  we  cast  him  out?     And 
Jesus  said  unto  them,  Because  of  your  unbelief. 
Howbeit  this  kind  goeth  not  out  but  by  prayer  and 
fasting" 

Here,  therefore,  the  words  of  Jesus  imply  that  the  dis- 
ciples did  not  fast.  Yet  the  observation  is  made  in  that 
incidental  manner  in  which  a  fact  familiar  to  the  mind  of 
the  speaker  so  often  comes  out.  It  has  not  the  smallest 
appearance  of  being  introduced  for  the  purpose  of  confirm- 
ing any  previous  assertion  to  the  same  effect.  Yet  in 
Chapter  ix.  ver.  14,  we  had  been  told  that  the  disciples  of 
John  came  to  Jesus,  saying,  «  Why  do  we  and  the  Phari- 


276  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    IV. 

sees  fast  oft,  but  thy  disciples  fast  not  ?"  It  may  be  re- 
marked, too,  that  the  former  passage  not  only  implies  that 
the  disciples  of  Jesus  did  not  fast,  but  that  Jesus  himself 
did,  and  that  the  latter  passage  singularly  enough  implies 
the  very  same  thing ;  for  it  does  not  run,  why  do  we  and 
the  Pharisees  fast  oft,  but  thou  and  thy  disciples  fast  not? 
(which  would  be  the  strict  antithesis),  but  only,  why  do 
thy  disciples  fast  not  ? 


XIV. 

Matth.  xxvi.  67. — "  Then  did  they  spit  in  his  face,  and 
buffeted  him ;  and  others  smote  him  with  the  palms 
of  their  hands,  saying,  Prophesy  unto  us,  thou  Christ, 
■who  is  he  that  smote  thee  ?" 
I  think  undesignedncss  may  be  traced  in  this  passage, 
both  in  what  is  expressed  and  what  is  omitted.     It  is  usual 
for  one  who  invents  a  story  which  he  wishes  should  be  be- 
lieved, to  be  careful  that  its  several  parts  hang  well  together 
— to  make  its  conclusions  follow  from  its  premises — and  to 
show  how  they  follow.     He  naturally  considers  that  he 
shall  be  suspected  unless  his  account  is  probable  and  con- 
sistent and  he  labors  to  provide  against  that  suspicion.   On 
the  other  hand,  he  who  is  telling  the  truth,  is  apt  to  state 
his  facts  and  leave  them  to  their  fate ;  he  speaks  as  one 
having   authority,  and  cares  not  about   the  why  or  the 
wherefore,  because  it  never  occurs  to  him  that  Buch  par- 
ticulars are  wanted  to  make  his  statement  credible,  and  ac- 
cordingly, if  such  particulars  are  discoverable  at  all,  it  is 
most  commonly  by  inference,  and  incidentally. 

Now  in  the  verse  of  St.  Matthew,  placed  at,  the  head  of 
this  paragraph,  it  is  written  that  "  they  smote  him  with  the 
palms  of  their  hands,  saying,  Prophesy  unto  us,  thou  Christ. 


PART  IV.         GOSPELS  AND  ACTS.  277 

who  is  he  that  smote  thee  ?"  Had  it  happened  that  the 
records  of  the  other  Evangelists  had  been  lost,  no  critical 
acuteness  could  have  possibly  supplied  by  conjecture  the 
omission  which  occurs  in  this  passage,  and  yet,  without  that 
omission  being  supplied,  the  true  meaning  of  the  passage 
must  forever  have  lain  hid  ;  for  where  is  the  propriety  of 
asking  Christ  to  prophesy  who  smote  him,  when  he  had 
the  offender  before  his  eyes?  But  when  we  learn  from  St. 
Luke  (xii.  64)  that  "  the  men  that  held  Jesus  blindfolded 
him"  before  they  asked  him  to  prophesy  who  it  was  that 
smote  him,  we  discover  what  St.  Matthew  intended  to  com- 
municate, namely,  that  they  proposed  this  test  of  his  divine 
mission,  whether,  without  the  use  of  sight,  he  could  tell 
who  it  was  that  struck  him.  Such  an  oversight  as  this  in 
St.  Matthew  it  is  difficult  to  account  for  on  any  other  sup- 
position than  the  truth  of  the  history  itself,  which  set  its 
author  above  all  solicitude  about  securing  the  reception  of 
his  conclusions  by  a  cautious  display  of  the  grounds  whereon 
they  were  built. 


XV. 

Wn at  was  the  charge  on  which  the  Jews  condemned 
Christ  to  death?1 

Familiar  as  this  question  may  at  first  seem,  the  answer 
is  cot  so  obvious  as  might  be  supposed.  By  a  careful  pe- 
rusal of  the  trial  of  our  Lord,  as  described  by  the  several 
Evangelists,  it  will  be  found  that  the  charges  were  two,  of 
a  nature  quite  distinct,  and  preferred  with  a  most  appro- 

1  The  following  argument  waa  suggested  to  me  by  reading  Wilson's 
"  Illustrations  of  the  Method  of  Explaining  the  New  Testament  by  the 
Early  opinions  of  Jews  and  Christians  concerning  Christ." 

24 


278  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    IV. 

priate  reference  to  the  tribunals  before  which  they  were 
made. 

Thus  the  first  hearing  was  before  "  the  Chief  Priests 
and  all  the  Council"  a  Jewish  and  ecclesiastical  court ; 
accordingly,  Christ  was  then  accused  of  blasphemy.  i:  I 
adjure  thee  by  the  living  God,  that  thou  tell  us  whether 
thou  be  the  Son  of  God"  said  Caiaphas  to  him,  in  the  hope 
of  convicting  him  out  of  his  own  mouth.  When  Jesus  in 
his  reply  answered  that  he  was,  "  then  the  high-priest  rent 
his  clothes,  saying,  He  hath  spoken  blasphemy  ;  what  fur- 
ther need  have  ice  of  witnesses  1  behold,  now  ye  have 
heard  his  blasphemy."     (Matt.  xxvi.  65.) 

Shortly  after,  he  is  taken  before  Pilate,  the  Roman  gov- 
ernor, and  here  the  charge  of  blasphemy  is  altogether  sup- 
pressed, and  that  of  seditioji  substituted.  "  And  the  whole 
multitude  of  them  arose,  and  led  him  unto  Pilate  :  and 
they  began  to  accuse  him,  saying,  We  found  this  fellow 
perverting  the  nation,  and  forbidding  to  give  tribute  to 
Caisar,  saying,  that  he  himself  is  Christ,  a  king."  (Luke 
xxiii.  2.)  And  on  this  plea  it  is  that  they  press  his  convic- 
tion, reminding  Pilate,  that  if  he  let  him  go  he  was  not 
Caesar's  friend. 

This  difference  in  the  nature  of  the  accusation,  accord- 
ing to  the  quality  and  characters  of  the  judges,  is  not  forced 
upon  our  notice  by  the  Evangelists,  as  though  they  were 
anxious  to  give  an  air  of  probability  to  their  narrative  by 
such  circumspection  and  attention  to  propriety  ;  on  the 
contrary,  it  is  touched  upon  in  so  cursory  and  unemphatic 
a  manner,  as  to  be  easily  overlooked  ;  and  I  venture  to  say. 
that  it  is  actually  overlooked  by  most  readers  of  the  Gos- 
pels. Indeed,  how  perfectly  agreeable  to  the  temper  of  the 
times,  and  of  the  parties  concerned,  such  a  proceeding  was, 
can  scarcely  be  perceived  at  first  sight.  The  coincidence, 
therefore,  will  appear  more  striking  if  we  examine  it  some- 


PART    IV.  GOSPELS    AND    ACTS.  279 

what  more  closely.  A  charge  of  blasphemy  was,  of  all 
others,  the  best  fitted  to  detach  the  multitude  from  the 
cause  of  Christ. ;  and  it  is  only  by  a  proper  regard  to  this 
circumstance,  that  we  can  obtain  the  true  key  to  the  con- 
flicting sentiments  of  the  people  towards  him  ;  one  while 
hailing  him,  as  they  do,  with  rapture,  and  then  again 
striving  to  put  him  to  death. 

Thus  when  Jesus  walked  in  Solomon's  Porcb,  the  Jews 
came  round  about  him  and  said  unto  him, ':  If  thou  be  the 
Christ  tell  us  plainly  ?— Jesus  answered  them,  I  (old  you, 
and  ye  believed   not."     He  then  goes  on  to  speak  of' the 
works  which  testified  of  him,  and  adds,  in  conclusion,  "I 
and  my  Father  are  one."     The  effect  of  which  words  was 
instantly  this,  that  the  Jews  (i.e.  the  people)  took  up  stones 
to  stone  him,  «  for  blasphemy,  and  because  being  a  man, 
he  made  himself  God."     (John  x.  33.)     Again  in  the  sixth 
chapter  of  St.  John,  we  read  of  five  thousand  men,  who, 
having  witnessed  his  miracles,  actually  acknowledged  him 
as  "that  prophet  that  should  come  into  the  world,"  nay, 
even  wished  to  take  him  by  force  and  make  him  a  king: 
yet  the  very  next  day.  when  Christ  said  to  these  same 
people,  "This  is  that  bread  which  came  down  from  heav- 
en," they  murmured  at  him,  doubtless  considering  him  to 
lay  claim  to  divinity ;    for  he  replies,  "  Doth  this  offend 
you?  what  and  if  ye  shall  see  the  Son  of  Man  ascend  up 
where  he  was  before  ?"  expressions,  at  which  such  serious 
offence  was  taken,  that  "from  that  time  many  of  his  dis- 
ciples  went  back,   and  walked  with   him  no  more.''     So 
that  it.  is  not  in  these  days  only  that  men  forsake  Christ 
from  a  reluctance  to  acknowledge  (as  he  demands  of  them) 
his  Godhead.     And  again,  when  Jesus  cured  the  impotent 
man  on  the  Sabbath-day,  and   in   defending  himself  for 
having  so  done,  said,  "my  Father  worketli  hitherto,  and  I 
work/'  we  are  told,  "therefore  the  Jews  sought  (he  more 


280  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    IV. 

to  kill  him,  because  he  not  only  had  broken  the  Sabbath, 
but  said  also  that  God  was  his  Father,  making  himself  equal 
with  God."  (John  v.  18.)  So,  on  another  occasion;  when 
Jesus  had  been  speaking  with  much  severity  in  the  temple, 
we  find  him  unmolested,  till  he  adds,  "  Verily,  verily,  I  say 
unto  you.  Before  Abraham  was.  I  am"  (John  viii.  58;) 
but  no  sooner  had  he  so  said,  than  ':  they  took  up  stones  to 
cast  at  him."  In  like  manner,  (to  come  to  the  last  scene 
of  his  mortal  life,)  when  he  entered  Jerusalem  he  had  the 
people  in  his  favor,  for  the  chief  priests  and  scribes  "  feared 
them ;"  yet,  very  shortly  after,  the  tide  was  so  turned 
against  him,  that  the  same  people  asked  Barabbas  rather 
than  Jesus.  And  why?  As  Messiah  they  were  anxious 
to  receive  him,  which  was  the  character  in  which  he  had 
entered  Jerusalem — but  they  rejected  him  as  the  "  Son  of 
God"  which  was  the  character  in  which  he  stood  before 
them  at  his  trial :  facts  which,  taken  in  a  doctrinal  view, 
are  of  no  small  value,  proving,  as  they  do,  that  the  Jews 
believed  Christ  to  lay  claim  to  divinity,  however  they 
might  dispute  or  deny  the  right.  It  is  consistent,  there- 
fore, with  the  whole  tenor  of  the  Gospel  history,  that  the 
enemies  of  Christ,  to  gain  their  end  with  the  Jews,  should 
have  actually  accused  him  of  blasphemy,  as  they  are  rep- 
resented to  have  done,  and  should  have  succeeded.  Nor 
is  it  less  consistent  with  that  history,  that  they  should 
have  actually  waived  the  charge  of  blasphemy,  when  they 
brought  him  before  a  Roman  magistrate,  and  substituted 
that  of  sedition  in  ils  stead;  for  the  Roman  governors,  it 
is  well  known,  were  very  indifferent  about  religious  dis- 
putes— they  had  the  toleration  of  men  who  had  no  creed 
of  their  own.  Gallio,  we  hear  in  aftertimes, ':  cared  for 
none  of  these  things  ;''  and.  in  the  same  spirit,  Lygias 
writes  to  Felix  about  Paul,  that.  "  he  perceived  him  to  be 
accused  of  questions  concerning  the  law.   but  to  have 


PART    IV.  GOSPELS    AND    ACTS.  281 

nothing  laid  to  his  charge  worthy  of  death  or  of  bonds." 
(Acts  xxiii.  29.) 

Indeed,  this  case  of  Paul  serves  in  a  very  remarkable 
manner  to  illustrate  that  of  our  Lord  ;  and  at  the  same 
time  in  itself  furnishes  a  second  coincidence,  founded  upon 
exactly  the  same  facts.  For  the  accusation  brought  against 
Paul  by  his  enemies,  when  they  had  Jews  to  deal  with, 
and,  no  doubt,  that  which  was  brought  against  him  in  the 
Jewish  court,  was  blasphemy  :  "  Men  of  Israel,  this  is 
the  man  that  teacheth  all  men  everywhere  against  the 
people,  and  the  law,  and  this  place."1  But  when  this 
same  Paul,  on  the  same  occasion,  was  brought  before 
Felix,  the  Roman  governor,  the  charge  became,  sedition.. 
"  We  have  found  this  man  a  pestilent  fellow,  and  a  mover 
of  sedition  among  all  the  Jews  throughout  the  world."2 

It  may  be  remarked,  that  this  is  not  so  much  a  casual 
coincidence  between  parallel  passages  of  several  Evan- 
gelists, as  an  instance  of  singular,  but  undesigned  har- 
mony, amongst  the  various  component  parts  of  one  piece 
of  history,  which  they  all  record  :  the  proceedings  before 
two  very  different  tribunals  being  represented  in  a  manner 
the  most  agreeable  to  the  known  prejudices  of  all  the  par- 
ties concerned. 


XVI. 

Matth.  xxvi.  71. — "And  when  he  was  gone  out  into  the 
Porch  (id»  nvX&pu),  another  maid  saw  him,  and  said 
unto  them.  This  man  was  also  with  Jesus  of  Naza- 
reth."' 

How  came  it  to  pass  that  Peter,  a  stranger,  who  had  en- 
tered the  house  in  (he  night,  and  under  circumstances  of 

I  Acts  xxi.  23.  2  lb.  xxiv.  5.     (See  Biscoe  on  the  Acts,  p.  245.) 

24* 


282  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    IV. 

some  tumult  and  disorder,  was  thus  singled  out  by  the 
maid  in  the  Porch  ? 

Let  us  turn  to  .St.  John,  (ch.  xviii.  ver.  16,)  and  we  shall 
find,  that,  after  Jesus  had  entered,  "  Peter  stood  at  the  door 
without,  till  that  other  disciple  went  out  which  was  known 
unto  the  high-priest,  and  spake  unto  her  that  kept  the 
door,  and  brought  in  Peter."  Thus  was  the  attention  of 
that  girl  directed  to  Peter,  (a  fact  of  which  St.  Matthew 
gives  no  hint  whatever,)  and  thus  we  see  how  it  happened 
that  he  was  recognized  in  the  Porch.  Here  is  a  minute 
indication  of  veracity  in  St.  Matthew,  which  would  have 
been  lost  upon  us  had  not  the  Gospel  of  St.  John  come 
down  to  our  times  ; — and  how  many  similar  indications 
may  be  hid,  from  a  want  of  other  contemporary  histories 
with  which  to  make  a  comparison,  it  is  impossible  to  con- 
jecture. 


XVII. 

My  next  instance  of  coincidence  without  design  is  taken 
from  the  account  of  certain  circumstances  attending  the 
feeding  of  the  five  thousand.  And  here  again,  be  it  re- 
marked, an  indication  of  veracity  is  found,  as  formerly, 
where  the  subject  of  the  narrative  is  a  miracle. 

In  the  sixth  chapter  of  St.  Mark  we  are  told,  that  Jesus 
said  to  his  disciples,  ':  come  ye  yourselves  apart  into  a 
desert  place."  (it  was  there  where  the  miracle  was  wrought.) 
t:  and  rest  a  while ;  for  there  were  many,"  adds  the 
K\  mgelist,  by  way  of  accounting  for  his  temporary  seclu- 
sion, "coming  and  going,  and  they  had  no  leisure  so 
much  as  to  eat."  How  it  happened  that  so  many  were 
coming  and  going  through  Capernaum  at  that  time,  above 
all  others,  this  Evangelist  does  not  give  us  the  slightest 


PART    IV.  GOSPELS    AND    ACTS. 


283 


hint;  neither  how  it  came  to  pass,  that,  by  retiring  for  a 
while,  Jesus  and  his  disciples  would  escape  the  inconve- 
nience. Turn  we  then  to  the  parallel  passage  in  St.  John, 
and  there  we  shall  find  the?  matter  explained  at  once, 
though  certainly  this  explanation  could  never  have  been 
given  with  a  reference  to  the  very  casual  expression  of  St. 
Mark.  In  St.  John  we  do  not  meet  with  one  word  about 
Jesus  retiring  for  a  white  into  the  desert,  for  the  purpose 
of  being  apart,  or  that  he  would  have  been  put  to  any  in- 
convenience by  staying  at  Capernaum,  but  we  are  told, 
(what  perfectly  agrees  with  these  two  circumstances.)  "  that 
the  Passover,  a  feast  of  the  Jews,  was  nigh,"  (vi.  4.) 
Hence,  then,  the  M  coming  and  going"  through  Capernaum 
was  so  unusually  great,  and  hence,  if  Jesus  and  his  dis- 
ciples rested,  in  the  desert  ':  a  while,"  the  crowd,  which 
was  pressing  towards  Jerusalem  from  every  part  of  the 
country,  would  have  subsided,  and  drawn  off  to  the  capi- 
tal. For  it  may  be  observed  that  the  desert  place  being  at 
some  distance  from  Capernaum,  through  which  city  the 
great  road  lay  from  the  north  to  Jerusalem,  the  multitude 
could  not  follow  Jesus  there  without  some  inconvenience 
and  delay. 

The  confusion  which  prevailed  throughout  the  Holy 
Land  at  this  great  festival  we  may  easily  imagine,  when 
we  read  in  Josephus,1  that,  for  the  satisfaction  of  Nero,  his 
officer,  Cestius,  on  one  occasion,  endeavored  to  reckon  up 
the  number  of  those  who  shared  in  the  national  rite  at 
Jerusalem.  By  counting  the  victims  sacrificed^  and  allow- 
ing a  company  of  ten  to  each  victim,  he  found  that  nearly 
two  millions  six  hundred  thousand  souls  were  present; 
and  it  may  be  observed,  that  this  method  of  calculation 
would  not  include  the  many  persons  who  must  have  been 

i  Eel.  Jud.  vi.  9.  $  3. 


284  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART  IV. 

disqualified  from  actually  partaking  of  the  sacrifice,  by  the 
places  of  their  birth  and  the  various  causes  of  uncleanness. 
I  cannot  forbear  remarking  another  incident  in  the  trans- 
action we  are  now  considering,  in  itself  a  trifle,  but  not, 
perhaps,  on  that  account,  less  fit  for  corroborating  the  his- 
tory. We  read  in  St.  John,  that  when  Jesus  had  reached 
this  desert  place,  he  "  lifted  up  his  eyes  and  saw  a  great 
multitude  come  unto  him,  and  he  said  unto  Philip, 
Whence  shall  we  buy  bread  that  these  may  eat  V  (vi.  5.) 
Why  should  this  question  have  been  directed  to  Philip  in 
particular?  If  we  had  the  Gospel  of  St.  John  and  not 
the  other  Gospels,  we  should  see  no  peculiar  propriety  in 
this  choice,  and  should  probably  assign  it  to  accident.  If 
we  had  the  other  Gospels,  and  not  that  of  St.  John,  we 
should  not  be  put  upon  the  inquiry,  for  they  make  no  men- 
tion of  the  question  having  been  addressed  expressly  to 
Philip.  But,  by  comparing  St.  Luke  with  St.  John,  we 
discover  the  reason  at  once.  By  St.  Luke,  and  by  him 
alone,  we  are  informed,  that  the  desert  place  where  the 
miracle  was  wrought  "  teas  belonging  to  Beth  said  a."  (i\'. 
10.)  By  St.  John  we  are  informed,  (although  not  in  the 
passage  where  he  relates  the  miracle,  which  is  worthy  of 
remark,  but  in  another  chapter  altogether  independent  of 
it,  ch.i.  41)  that  u  Philip  was  of  Bethsaida."  To  whom 
then,  could  the  question  have  been  directed  so  properly  as 
to  him.  who,  being  of  the  immediate  neighborhood,  was 
the  most  likely  to  know  where  bread  was  to  be  bought? 
Here  again;  then,  I  maintain,  we  have  strong  indications  of 
veracity  in  the  case  of  a  miracle  itself;  and  I  leave  it  to 
others,  who  may  have  ingenuity  and  inclination  for  the  task, 
to  weed  out  the  falsehood  of  the  miracle  from  the  manifest 
reality  of  the  circumstances  which  attend  it,  and  to  sepa- 
rate fiction  from  fact,  which  is  in  the  very  closest  combina- 
tion with  it. 


PART    IV.  GOSPELS    AND    ACTS.  285 


XVIII. 

Mark  xv.  21.— "  And  they  compel  one  Simon,  a  Cyrenian, 
who  passed  by,  coming  out  of  the  country,  the  father 
of  Alexander  and  Rufus,  to  bear  his  cross. ;' 

Clement  of  Alexandria,  who  lived  about  the  end  of 
the  second  century,  declares,  that  Mark  wrote  this  Gospel 
on  St.  Peter's  authority  at  Rome.  Jerome,  who  lived  in 
the  fourth  century,  says,  that  Mark,  the  disciple  and  inter- 
preter of  St.  Peter,  being  requested  by  his  brethren  at 
Rome,  wrote  a  short  Gospel. 

Now  this  circumstance  may  account  for  his  designating 
Simon  as  the  father  of  Rufus  at  least ;  for  we  find  that  a 
disciple  of  that  name,  and  of  considerable  note,  was  resi- 
dent at  Rome,  when  St.  Paul  wrote  his  Epistle  to  the 
Romans.  "  Salute  Rufus"  says  he,  "  chosen  in  the 
Lord"  (xvi.  13.)  Thus,  by  mentioning  a  man  living  upon 
the  spot  where  he  was  writing,  and  amongst  the  people 
whom  he  addressed,  Mark  was  giving  a  reference  for  the 
truth  of  his  narrative,  which  must  have  been  accessible 
and  satisfactory  to  all ;  since  Rufus  could  not  have  failed 
knowing  the  particulars  of  the  crucifixion,  (the  great  event 
to  which  the  Christians  looked,)  when  his  father  had  been 
so  intimately  concerned  in  it  as  to  have  been  the  reluctant 
bearer  of  the  cross. 

Of  course,  the  force  of  this  argument  depends  on  the 
identity  of  the  Rufus  of  St.  Mark  and  the  Rufus  of  St. 
Paul,  which  I  have  no  means  of  proving  :l  but  admit  ting- 
it  to  be  probable  that  they  were  the  same  persons,  (which. 
I  think,  may  be  admitted,  for  St.  Paul,  we  see.  expressly 
speaks  of  a  distinguished  disciple  of  the  name  of  Rufus  at 
Rome,  and  St.  Mark,  writing  for  the  Romans,  mentions 

1  See  Michaelis,  Vol.  in.  p.  213. 


286  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    IV. 

Rufus,  the  son  of  Simon,  as  well  known  to  them,) — -admit- 
ting this,  the  coincidence  is  striking,  and  serves  to  account 
for  what  otherwise  seems  a  piece  of  purely  gratuitous  and 
needless  information  offered  by  St.  Mark  to  his  readers, 
namely,  that  Simon  was  the  father  of  Alexander  and 
Rufus  ;  a  fact  omitted  by  the  other  Evangelists,  and  appa- 
rently turned  to  no  advantage  by  himself. 


XIX. 

Mark  xv.  25. — "And  it  was  the  third  hour,  and  they  cru- 
cified him." 
33. — "And  when  the  sixth  hour  was  come,  there  was 
darkness  over  the  whole  land  until  the  ninth  hour." 
It  has  been  observed  to  me  by  an  intelligent  friend,  who 
has  turned  his  attention  to  the  internal  evidence  of  the 
Gospels,  that  it  will  be  found,  on  examination,  that  the 
scoffs  and  insults  which  were  levelled  at  our  Saviour  on  the 
cross,  were  all  during  the  early  part  of  the  crucifixion, 
and  that  a  manifest  change  of  feeling  towards  him,  arising, 
as  it  should  seem,  from  a  certain  misgiving  as  to  his  char- 
acter, is  discoverable  in  the  bystanders  as  the  scene  drew 
nearer  to  its  close:  I  think^the  remark  just  and  valuable. 
It  is  at  the  first  that  we  read  of  those  "who  passed  by 
railing  on  him,  and  wagging  their  heads."  (Mark  xv.  29;) 
of  "the  chief  priests  and  scribes  mocking  him,"  31 ;  of 
"those  thai  were  crucified  with  him  reviling  him,"  32  ;  of 
the  "soldiers  mocking  him  and  offering'  him. vinegar," 
(Luke  xxiii.  36,)  pointing  out  to  him  most  likely,  the  "ves- 
sel of  vinegar  which  was  set,"  or  holding  a  portion  of  it 
beyond  his  reach,  by  way  of  aggravating  the  pains  of  in- 
tense thirst,  which  must  have  attended  this  lingering  mode 
of  death: — that  all  this  occurred  at  the  be<nnnin£T  of  the 


PART    IV.  THE    GOSPELS    AND    ACTS.  287 

Passion  is  the  natural  conclusion  to  be  drawn  from  the 
narratives  of  St.  Matthew,  St.  Mark,  and  St.  Luke. 

But,  during  the  latter  part  of  it,  we  hear  nothing  of  this 
kind  ;  on  the  contrary,  when  Jesus  cried,  "I  thirst,"  there 
was  no  mockery  offered,  but  a  sponge  was  filled  with  vin- 
egar, and  put  on  a  reed  and  applied  to  his  lips,  with  re- 
markable alacrity ;  "one  nut'*  and  did  it,  (Mark  xv.  31:) 
and,  from  the  misunderstanding  of  the  words  "Eli,  Eli," 
it  is  clear  that  the  spectators  had  some  suspicion  that  Elias 
might  come  to  take  him  down.  Do  not,  then,  these  cir- 
cumstances accord  remarkably  well  with  the  alleged  fact, 
that  "  there  ivas  darkness  over  all  the  land  from  the  sixth 
to  the  ninth  hour?'  (Matth.  xxvii.  45  ;)  Mark  xv.  33.  Is 
not  this  change  of  conduct  in  the  merciless  crew  that  sur- 
rounded the  cross  very  naturally  explained,  by  the  awe 
with  which  they  contemplated  the  gloom  as  it  took  effect? 
and  does  it  not  strongly,  though  undesignedly,  confirm  the 
assertion,  that  such  a  fearful  darkness  there  actually  was? 


XX. 

Mark  xv.  43. — "  And  Joseph  of  Arimathaea,  an  honorable 

counsellor,  which  also  waited  for  the  kingdom  of  God, 

came,  and  went  in  boldly  unto  Pilate,  and  craved  the 

body  of  Jesus." 

It  is  evident  that  the  courage  of  Joseph  on  this  occasion 

had  impressed  the  mind  of  the  Evangelist — he  "went  in 

boldly?  tolfj^aag  fioTj.ds — he  had  the  boldness  to   go  in — 

he  ventured  to  go  in. 

Now  by  comparing  the  parallel  passage  in  St.  John,  we 
very  distinctly  trace  the  train  of  thought  which  was  work- 
ing in  St.  Mark's  mind  when  he  used  this  expression,  but 
which  would  have  entirely  escaped  us,  together  with  the 


288  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    IV. 

evidence  it  furnishes  for  the  truth  of  the  narrative,  had  not 
the  Gospel  of  St.  John  come  down  to  us.  For  there  we 
read  (xix.  38),  "  And  after  this  Joseph  of  Arimathaea,  being 
a  disciple  of  Jesus,  but  secretly  for  fear  of  the  Jews,  be- 
sought Pilate  that  he  might  take  away  the  body  of  Jesus." 

It  appears,  therefore,  that  Joseph  was  known  to  be  a 
timid  disciple  ;  which  made  his  conduct  on  the  present 
occasion  seem  to  St.  Mark  remarkable,  and  at  variance 
with  his  ordinary  character  ;  for  there  might  be  supposed 
some  risk  in  manifesting  an  interest  in  the  corpse  of  Jesus, 
whom  the  Jews  had  just  persecuted  to  the  death. 

Moreover,  it  may  be  observed  that  St.  John,  in  the  pas- 
sage before  us,  continues,  "  And  (here  came  also  Nicodemus, 
which  at  the  first  came  to  Jesus  by  night,  and  brought  a 
mixture  of  myrrh  and  aloes" — as  though  the  timid  char- 
acter of  Joseph  was  uppermost  in  his  thoughts  too,  (though 
he  says  nothing  of  his  going  in  boldly.)  and  suggested  to 
him  Nicodemus,  and  what  he  did  ;  another  disciple  of  the 
same  class  as  Joseph ;  and  whose  constitutional  failing  he 
does  intimate,  occurred  to  him  at  the  moment,  by  the  no- 
tice that  it  was  the  same  who  had  come  to  Jesus  by  night. 

I  will  add,  that  both  these  cases  of  Joseph  and  Nicode- 
mus bear  upon  the  coincidence  in  the  last  Number ;  for 
whence  did  these  fearful  men  derive  their  courage  on  this 
occasion,  but  from  having  witnessed  the  circumstances 
which  attended  the  crucifixion  ? 


XXI. 

Luke  vi.  1,  2. — "And  it  came  to  pass  on  the  second  Sab- 
bath after  the  first,  (ivoa@(}&ra  deviFQOTTQwiu^  that  he 
went  through  the  corn-fields  ;  and  his  disciples  plucked 


PART    IV.  GOSPELS    AND    ACTS.  289 

the  ears  of  corn,  and  did  eat,  rubbing  them  in  their 
hands.     And  certain  of  the  Pharisees  said,"  &c. 

This  transaction  occurred  on  the  first  Sabbath  after  the 
second  day  of  unleavened  bread;  on  which  day  the  wave 
sheaf  was  offered,  as  the  first  fruits  of  the  harvest;1  and 
from  which  day  the  fifty  days  were  reckoned  to  the  Pen- 
tecost. 

Is  it  not  therefore  very  natural  that  this  conversation 
should  have  taken  place  at  this  time,  and  that  St.  Luke 
should  have  especially  given  the  date  of  the  conversation, 
as  well  as  the  conversation  itself? 

It  being  the'first  Sabbath  after  the  day  when  the  first 
fruits  of  the  corn  were  cut,  accords  perfectly  with  the  fact 
that  the  disciples  should  be  walking  through  fields  of  stand- 
ing corn  at  that  season. 

The  Rite,  which  had  just  then  been  celebrated,  an  epc;h 
in  the  church,  as  well  as  an  epoch  in  the  year,  naturally 
turned  the  minds  of  all  the  parties  here  concerned  to  the 
subject,  of  corn — the  Pharisees,  to  find  cause  for  cavil  in  it 
— Jesus,  to  find  cause  for  instruction  in  it — St.  Luke  to 
find  cause  for  especially  naming  the  second  Sabbath  after 
the  first,  as  the  period  of  the  incident.  And  yet,  be  it  ob- 
served, no  connection  is  pointed  out  between  the  time  and 
the  transaction,  either  in  the  conversation  itself,  or  in  the 
Evangelist's  history  of  it.  That  is,  there  is  coincidence 
without  design  in  both. 

XXII. 

Luke  ix.  53. — "And  they  did  not  receive  him,  because  his 
face  was  as  though  he  would  go  to  Jerusalem''' 
Jesus  was  then  going  to  the  Passover  at  Jerusalem,  and 
was  therefore  plainly  acknowledging  that  men  ought  to 

1  Lev.  xxiii.  10,  11,  12. 

25 


290  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    IV. 

worship  there,  contrary  to  the  practice  of  the  Samaritans, 
who  had  set  up  the  Temple  at  Gerizim,  in  opposition  to 
that  of  the  Holy  City.  That  this  was  the  cause  of  irrita- 
tion is  implied  in  the  expression,  that  they  would  not  re- 
ceive him,  "  because  his  face  was  as  though  he  would  go 
to  Jerusalem.'"  Let  us  observe,  then,  how  perfectly  this 
account  harmonizes  with  that  which  St.  John  gives  of  Je- 
sus' interview  with  the  woman  of  Samaria  at  the  well. 
Then  Jesus  was  coming  from  Judaea,  and  at  a  season  of 
the  year  when  no  suspicion  could  attach  to  him  of  having 
been  at  Jerusalem  for  devotional  purposes,  for  it  wanted 
"  four  months  before  the  harvest  should  come,"  and  with  it 
the  Passover.  Accordingly,  on  this  occasion,  Jesus  and  his 
disciples  were  treated  with  civility  and  hospitality  by  the 
Samaritans.  They  purchased  bread  in  the  town  without 
being  exposed  to  any  insults,  and  they  were  even  requested 
to  tarry  with  them. 

I  cannot  but  think  that  the  stamp  of  truth  is  very  visible 
in  all  this.  It.  was  natural,  that  at  certain  seasons  of  the 
year  (at  the  great  feasts)  this  jealous  spirit  should  be  ex- 
cited, which  at  others  might  be  dormant;  and  though  it  is 
not  expressly  stated  by  the  one  Evangelist,  that  the  insult 
of  the  villagers  was  at  a  season  when  it  might  be  expected, 
yet  from  a  casual  expression,  (ver.  51,)  such  may  be  in- 
ferred to  have  been  the  case.  And  though  it  is  not  ex- 
pressly stated  by  the  other  Evangelist,  that  the  hospitality 
of  the  Samaritans  was  exercised  at  a  more  propitious  sea- 
son of  the  year,  yet  by  an  equally  casual  expression  in  the 
course  of  the  chapter,  (ver.  35.)  that,  too,  is  ascertained  to 
have  been  the  fact.  Surely,  it  is  beyond  the  reach  of  the 
rnost  artful  imposture  to  observe  so  strict  a  propriety  even 
in  the  subordinate  parts  of  the  scheme,  especially  where  less 
distinctness  of  detail  would  scarcely  have  excited  suspicion  ; 
and  surely  it  is  a  circumstance  most  satisfactory  to  every 


. 


PART    IV.  GOSPELS    AND    ACTS.  291 

reasonable  mind  to  discover,  that  the  evidence  of  the  truth 
of  that  Gospel  (on  which  our  hopes  are  anchored)  is,  not 
only  the  more  conspicuous  the  more  minutely  it  is  exam- 
ined, but  that,  without  such  examination,  full  justice  can- 
not be  done  to  the  variety  and  pregnancy  of  its  proofs. 


XXIII. 

John  ii.  7.— «  Jesus  saith  unto  them,  Fill  the  water-pots 
with  water." 
There  appears  to  me  to  be  in  this  passage  an  unde- 
signed coincidence,  very  slight  and  trivial  indeed  in  its 
character,  but  not  on  that  account  less  valuable  as  a  mark 
of  truth.     These  water-pots  had  to  be  filled  before  Jesus 
could  perform  the  miracle.     It  follows,  therefore,  that  they 
had  been  emptied  of  their  contents— the  water  had  been 
drawn  out  of  them.     But  for  what,  purpose  was  it  used, 
and  why  were  these  vessels  here  ?     It  was  for  purifying. 
For  «  all  the  Jews,"  as  St.  Mark  tells  us  more  at  large  (vii.  3), 
'•except  they  wash   their  hands  oft.  eat  not,  holding  the 
tradition  of  the  elders."     The  vessels  therefore  being  now 
empty,  indicates  that  the  guests  had  clone  with  them— that 
the  meal  therefore  was  advanced  ;  for  it  was  before  they 
sat  down  to  it  that  they  performed  their  ablutions-a  cir- 
cumstance  which  accords  with  the  moment  when  our  Lord 
«a  represented  as  doing  this  miracle  ;  for  the  governor  of 
the  feast  said  to  the  bridegroom,  -Every  man  at  the  be- 
ginning doth  set  forth  good  wine,-but  thou  hast  kept  the 
good  wine  until  now.-     It  is  satisfactory,  that  in  the  record 
oi  a  great  miracle,  like  this,  the  minor  circumstances  i 
connection  with  it  should  be  in  keeping  with  one  another, 


in 


292  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    IV. 


XXIV. 

John  iii.  1,  2. — "  There  was  a  man  of  the  Pharisees,  named 
Nicodemus,  a  ruler  of  the  Jews  :  The  same  came  to 
Jesus  by  night,  and  said  unto  him,  Rabbi,"  &c. 
It  is  a  remarkable  and  characteristic  feature  of  the  dis- 
courses of  our  Lord,  that  they  are  often  prompted,  or  shaped, 
or  illustrated,  by  the  event  of  the  moment ;  by  some  scene 
or  incident  that  presented  itself  to  him  at  the  time  he  was 
speaking.  It  is  scarcely  necessary  to  give  examples  of  a 
fact  so  undisputed.  Thus  it  was  the  day  after  the  miracle 
of  the  loaves,  and  it  was  to  the  persons  who  had  witnessed 
that  miracle,  and  profited  by  it,  that  Jesus  said,  "  Labor  not 
for  the  meat  which  perisheth,  but  for  that  meat  which  en- 
dureth  unto  everlasting  life.1'1  &c.  And  much  more  to  the 
same  effect.  It  was  at  Jacob's  well,  and  in  reply  to  the 
question  of  the  woman,  "  How  is  it  that  thou,  being  a  Jew, 
askest  drink  of  me,  which  am  a  woman  of  Samaria?"2  that 
Jesus  spake  so  much  at  large  of  the  water  whereof  "  who- 
soever drank  should  never  thirst,"  &c.  It  was  whilst  tar- 
rying in  this  same  rural  spot,  that  calling  the  attention  of 
his  disciples  to  the  scene  around  them,  he  said,  "Say  not 
ye,  There  are  yet  four  months,  and  then  cometh  harvest  ? 
behold,  I  say  unto  you,  Lift  up  your  eyes,  and  look  on 
the  fields,  for  they  arc  white  already  to  harvest  i'"3  and 
lie  then  goes  on  to  remind  them  of  sowing  and  reaping  to 
be  done  in  another  and  higher  sense.  These  .are  the  few- 
instances  out  of  many  which  might  be  produced,  where  the 
incident  that  gave  rise  to  the  remarks  is  actually  related  ; 
and  by  which  the  habit  of  our  Lord's  discourse  is  proved  to 
be  such  as  I  have  described.  But  in  other  places,  the  incident 
itself  is  omitted,  and  but  for  some  casual  expression  which 

i  John  vi.  27.  2  lb.  iv.  9.  3  lb.  iv.  35. 


PART    IV.  GOSPELS    AND    ACTS.  293 

is  let  fall,  it  would  be  impossible  to  connect  the  discourse 
with  it ;  by  means,  however,  of  some  such  expression,  ap- 
parently intended  to  serve  no  such  purpose,  we  are  enabled 
to  get  at  the  incident,  and  so  discover  the  propriety  of  the 
discourse.  In  such  cases  we  are  furnished  once  more  with 
the  argument  of  coincidence  without  design — as  in  the  fol- 
lowing passage:  "In  the  last  day.  that  great  day  of  the 
feast,  Jesus  stood  and  cried,  saying,  If  any  man  thirst,  let 
him  come  unto  me,  and  drink.  He  that  believeth  on  me, 
as  the  Scripture  hath  said,  out  of  his  belly  shall  flow  rivers 
of  living  watqr,"1  &c.  Now  but  for  the  expression,  "  In  the 
last  day,  that  great  day  of  the  feast,"  we  should  have  been 
at  a  loss  to  know  the  circumstances  in  which  that  speech 
of  our  Lord  originated.  But  the  day  when  it  was  delivered 
being  named,  we  are  enabled  to  gather  from  other  sources, 
that  on  that  day,  the  eighth  of  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles,  it 
was  a  custom  to  offer  to  God  a  pot  of  water  drawn  from  the 
pool  of  Siloam.  Coupling  this  fact,  therefore,  with  our 
Lord's  practice,  already  established  by  other  evidence,  of 
allowing  the  spectacle  before  him  to  give  the  turn  to  his 
address,  we  may  conclude  that  he  spake  these  words  whilst 
he  happened  to  be  observing  the  ceremony  of  the  water- 
pot.  And  an  argument  thus  arises,  that  the  speech  here 
reported  is  genuine,  and  was  really  delivered  by  our  Lord. 
The  passage  then  in  St.  John,  with  which  I  have  head- 
ed this  paragraph,  furnishes  testimony  of  the  same  kind. 
It  describes  Nicodemus  as  coming  to  Jesus  by  night — fear, 
no  doubt,  prompting  him  to  use  this  secrecy.  Now  observe 
a  good  deal  of  the  language  which  Jesus  directs  to  him — 
••  And  this  is  the  condemnation,  that  light  is  come  into  the 
world,  and  men  loved  darkness  rather  than  light,  because 
their  deeds  are  evil.  For  every  one  that  docth  evil  hateth 
the  light,  neither  cometh  to  the  light,  lest  his  deeds  should 
i  John  vii.  37,  38. 

25* 


294 


THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    IV. 


be  reproved.  But  he  that  doeth  truth,  cometh  to  the  light, 
that  his  deeds  may  be  made  manifest,  that  they  are  wrought 
in  God  (vers.  19,  22).  When  we  remember  that  the  in- 
terview was  a  nocturnal  one,  and  that  Jesus  was  accus- 
tomed to  speak  with  a  reference  to  the  circumstances  about 
him  at  the  instant,  what  more  natural  than  the  turn  of 
this  discourse  1  What  more  satisfactory  evidence  could 
we  have,  than  this  casual  evidence,  that  the  visit  was  paid, 
and  the  speech  spoken,  as  St.  John  describes  ?  that  his 
narrative,  in  short,  is  true  V 

XXV. 

John  iv.  5. — "  Then  cometh  he  to  a  city  of  Samaria,  which 
is  called  Sychar.'; 
Here  Jesus  converses  with  the  woman  at  the  well. 
She  perceives  that  he  is  a  prophet.  She  suspects  that  he 
may  be  the  Christ.  She  spreads  her  report  of  him  through 
the  city.  The  inhabitants  are  awakened  to  a  lively  in- 
terest about  him.  Jesus  is  induced  to  tarry  there  two 
days ;  and  it  was  probably  the  favorable  disposition  to- 
wards him  which  he  found  to  prevail  there,  that  drew  from 
him  at  that  very  time  the  observation  to  his  disciples,  "  Say 
not  ye,  There  are  yet  four  months,  and  then  cometh  har- 
vest? behold,  I  say  unto  you,  Lift  up  your  eyes,  and  look 
on  the  fields  ;  for  they  are  white  already  to  harvest.  And 
he  that  reapcth  rcceiveth  wages,  and  gathereth  fruit  unto 
life  eternal:  that  both  he  that  sowcth  and  he  that  reap- 
cth may  rejoice  together.  And  herein  is  that  saying  true, 
One  soweth  and  another  reapeth.  I  sent  you  to  reap  that 
whereon  ye  bestowed  no  labor:  other  men  labored,  and  ye 
are  entered  into  their  labors."'    It  is  the  favorable  state  of 

1  I  was  put  upon  this  coincidence  by  a  passage  which   I  heard  in  one  of 
Mr.  Marsdcn's  Hulsean  Lectures. 


PART    IV.  GOSPELS    AND    ACTS.  295 

Samaria  for  the  reception  of  the  Gospel,  that  suggests 
these  reflections  to  Jesus,  he,  no  doubt,  perceiving  that  God 
had  much  "  people  in  that  city." 

Such  is  the  picture  of  the  religious  state  of  Sychar  pre- 
sented in  the  narrative  of  St.  John. 

Now  the  author  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  confirms 
the  truth  of  this  statement  in  a  remarkable  but  most  unin- 
tentional manner.  From  him  we  learn,  that  at  a  period 
a  few  years  later  than  this,  and  after  the  death  of  Jesus, 
Philip,  one  of  the  deacons,  "  went  down  to  the  city  of  Sa- 
maria," (the  emphatic  expression  marks  it  to  have  been 
Sychar,  the  capital.)  "and  preached  Christ  among  them." 
(Acts  viii.  5.)  His  success  was  just  what  might  have  been 
expected  from  the  account  we  have  read  in  St.  John  of  the 
previous  state  of  public  opinion  at  Sychar.  u  The  people 
with  one  accord  gave  heed  to  those  things  which  Philip 
spake,')  (ver.  6  ;)  and  "  when  they  believed  Philip  preach- 
ing the  things  concerning  the  kingdom  of  God  and  the 
name  of  Jesus  Christ,  they  were  baptized,  both  men  and 
women,"  (ver.  12.)  It  is  evident  that  these  histories  are 
not  got  up  to  corroborate  one  another.  It  is  not  at  all  an 
obvious  thought,  or  one  likely  to  present  itself  to  an  im- 
postor, that  it  might  be  prudent  to  fix  upon  Sychar  as  the 
imaginary  scene  of  Philip's  successful  labors,  seeing  that 
Jesus  had  been  well  received  there  some  years  before ;  at 
least  in  such  a  case  some  allusion  or  reference  would  have 
been  made  to  this  disposition  previously  evinced  ;  it  would 
not  have  been  left  to  the  reader  to  discover  it  or  not,  as  it 
might  happen,  where  the  chance  was  so  great  that  it 
would  be  overlooked.  Moreover,  his  recollections  of  the 
passage  in  St.  John  would  probably  have  been  studiously 
arrested  by  the  use  of  the  same  word  "Sychar,"  rather 
than  M  the  city  of  Samaria,"  as  designating  the  field  of 
Philip's  labors. 


296  THE    VERACITY   OF    THE  PART    IV 


XXVI. 

John  vi.  16. — ■'■'  And  when  even  was  now  come,  his  dis- 
ciples  went  down  into  the  sea,  and  entered  into  a  ship, 
and  went  over  the  sea  toward  Capernaum.  And  it 
was  now  dark,  and  Jesus  was  not  come  to  them. 
And  the  sea  arose  by  reason  of  a  great  wind  that 
blew.  »So  when  they  had  rowed  about  five-and-twenty 
or  thirty  furlongs,  they  see  Jesus  walking  on  the  sea, 
and  drawing  nigh  unto  the  ship,  and  they  were  afraid. 
But  he  saith  unto  them,  It  is  I ;  be  not  afraid.  Then 
they  willingly  received  him  into  the  ship,  and  imme- 
diately the  ship  was  at  the  land  whither  they  went. 
The  day  following,  when  the  people  which  stood  on 
the  other  side  of  the  sea  satv  that  there  was  none 
other  boat  there,  save  that  one  whereinto  his  dis- 
ciples were  entered,  and  that  Jesns  went  not  with  his 
disciples  into  the  boa/,  but  that  kis  disciples  were  gone 
away  alone  ;  (howbeit  there  came  other  boats  from 
Tiberias  nigh  unto  the  place  where  they  did  eat 
bread,  after  that  the  Lord  had  given  thanks  :)  when 
the  people  therefore  saw  that  Jesus  was  not  there, 
neither  his  disciples,  they  also  took  shipping,  and  came 
to  Capernaum,  seeking  for  Jesus.  And  when  they 
had  found  him  on  the  other  side  of  the  sea,  they  said 
unto  him,  Rabbi,  when  earnest  tJimt  hit her  ?" 

Matt.  xiv.  22. — "And  straightway  Jesus  constrained  his 
disciples  to  get  into  a  ship,  and  to  go  before  him  unto 
the  other  side,  while  he  sent  the  multitudes  away. 
And  when  he  had  sent  the  multitudes  away,  he  went 
up  into  a  mountain  apart  to  pray  :  and  when  the 
evening  was  come,  he  was  there  alone.     But  the  ship 


PART    IV.  GOSPELS    AND   ACTS.  297 

was  now  in  the  midst  of  the  sea,  tossed  with  the 
waves :  for  the  wind  was  contrary? 

It  appears  from  St.  John,  that  the  people  thought  that 
Jesus  was  still  on  the  side  of  the  lake  where  the  mira- 
cle had  been  wrought.  And  this  they  inferred  because 
there  was  no  other  boat  on  the  preceding  evening,  except 
that  in  which  the  disciples  had  gone  over  to  Capernaum 
on  the  other  side,  and  they  had  observed  that  Jesus  went 
not  with  them.  It  is  added,  however,  that,  "there  came 
other  boats  from  Tiberias?  (which  was  on  the  same  side 
as  Capernaum,)  nigh  unto  the  place  where  the  Lord  had 
given  thanks.  Now  why  might  they  not  have  supposed 
that  Jesus  had  availed  himself  of  one  of  these  return- 
boats,  and  so  made  his  escape  in  the  night?  St.  John 
gives  no  reason  why  they  did  not  make  this  obvious  in- 
ference. Let  us  turn  to  St.  Matthew's  account  of  the  same 
transaction,  (which  I  have  placed  at  the  head  of  this  para- 
graph,) and  we  speedily  learn  why  they  could  not.  In 
this  account  we  find  it  recorded,  not  simply  that  the  dis- 
ciples were  in  distress  in  consequence  of  the  sea  arising 
"  by  reason  of  a  great  wind  that  ble\v.:'  but  it  is  further 
stated,  that  "  the  wind  was  contrary?  i.  e.  the  wind  was 
blowing  from  Capernaum  and  Tiberias,  and  therefore  not 
only  n tight  the  ships  readily  come  from  Tiberias,  (the  in- 
cident mentioned  by  St.  John.)  a  course  for  which  the  wind 
(though  violent)  was  fair,  but  the  multitude  might  well 
conclude  that  with  such  a  wind  Jesus  could  not  have 
used  one  of  those  return-boats,  and  therefore  must  still  be 
amongst  them. 

Indeed,  nothing  can  be  more  probable  than  that  these 
ships  from  Tiberias  were  fishing  vessels,  which,  having 
been  overtaken  by  the  storm,  suffered  themselves  to  .be 
driven  before  the  gale,  to  the  opposite  coast,  where  they 
might  find  shelter  for  the  night;  for  what  could  such  a 


298 


THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    IV. 


number  of  boats,  as  sufficed  to  convey  the  people  across, 
(ver.  24,)  have  been  doing  at  this  desert  place,  neither  port, 
nor  town,  nor  market?  so  that  here  again  is  another 
instance  of  undesigned  consistency  in  the  narrative  ;  the 
very  fact  of  a  number  of  boats  resorting  to  this  '-'desert 
place,"  at  the  close  of  day,  strongly  indicating  (though  most 
incidentally)  that  the  sea  actually  was  rising,  (as  St.  John 
asserts,)  "  by  reason  of  a  great  wind  that  blew." 

I  further  think  this  to  be  the  correct  view  of  a  passage 
of  some  intricacy,  from  considering,  first,  the  question  which 
the  people  put  to  Jesus  on  finding  him  at  Capernaum  the 
next  day.  Full  as  they  must  have  been  of  the  miracle 
which  they  had  lately  witnessed,  and  anxious  to  see  the  rep- 
etition of  works  so  wonderful,  their  first  inquiry  is,  "  Rabbi, 
when  earnest  thou  hither  ?"  surely  an  inquiry  not  of  mere 
form,  but  manifestly  implying,  that,  under  the  circum- 
stances, it  could  only  have  been  by  some  extraordinary 
means  that  he  had  passed  across  ;  and  second,  from  observ- 
ing the  satisfactory  explanation  it  affords  of  the  parenthesis 
of  St.  John,  '•  howbeit  there  came  other  boats  from  Tibe- 
rias,' ....  which  no  longer  seems  a  piece  of  purely  gra- 
tuitous and  irrelevant  information,  but  turns  out  to  be 
equivalent  with  the  expression  in  St.  Matthew,  that  the 
"wind  was  contrary ;"  though  the  point  is  not  directly 
asserted,  but  only  a  fact  is  mentioned  from  which  such  an 
assertion  naturally  follows. 

It  might  indeed  be  said,  that  the  circumstance  of  the 
ships  coming  from  Tiberias  was  mentioned  for  the  purpose 
of  explaining  how  the  people  could  take  shipping,  (as  they 
are  stated  to  have  done  to  go  to  Capernaum,)  when  it  had 
been  before  affirmed  that  there  was  no  other  boat  there 
save  that  into  which  the  disciples  were  entered.  Such  cau- 
tion, however,  I  do  not  think  at  all  agreeable  to  the  spirit 
of  the  writings  of  the  Evangelists,  who  are  always  very 


PART    IV.  GOSPELS    AND    ACTS.  299 

careless  about  consequences,  not  troubling  themselves  to 
obviate  or  explain  the  difficulties  of  their  narrative.  But, 
whatever  may  be  judged  of  this  matter,  the  main  argu- 
ment remains  the  same  ;  and  a  minute  coincidence  between 
St.  John  and  St.  Matthew  is  made  out,  of  such  a  nature  as 
precludes  all  suspicion  of  collusion,  and  shows  consistency 
in  the  two  histories  without  the  smallest  design. 

And  here  again  I  will  repeat  the  observation,  which  I 
have  already  had  occasion  more  than  once  to  make — that 
the  truth  of  the  general  narrative  in  some  degree  involves 
the  truth  of  ^miracle.  For  if  we  are  satisfied  by  the  un- 
designed coincidence,  that  St.  Matthew  was  certainly  speak- 
ing truth  when  he  said,  the  wind  was  "  boisterous,"  how 
shall  we  presume  to  assert,  that  he  speaks  truth  no  longer, 
when  he  tells  us  in  the  same  breath  that  Jesus  "  walked  on 
the  sea,"  in  the  midst  of  that  very  storm,  and  that  when 
"  he  came  into  the  ship  the  wind  ceased  ?" 

Doubtless,  the  one  fact  does  not  absolutely  prove  the 
others,  but  in  all  ordinary  cases,  where  one  or  two  particu- 
lars in  a  body  of  evidence  are  so  corroborated  as  to  be  placed 
above  suspicion,  the  rest,  though  not  admitting  of  the  like 
corroboration,  are  nevertheless  received  without  dispute. 


XXVII. 

The  events  of  the  last  week  of  our  Saviour's  earthly  life, 
as  recorded  by  the  Evangelists,  will  furnish  us  with  sev- 
eral arguments  of  the  kind  we  are  collecting. 
1.  John  xii.  1. — "  Then   Jesus  six  days  before  the  Pass- 
over came  to  Bethany,  where  Lazarus  was." 

Bethany  was  a  village  at  the  mount  of  Olives  (Mark 
xi.  1),  near  Jerusalem  ;  and  it  was  in  his  approach  to  that 
city,  to  keep  the  last  Passover  and  die.  that  Jesus  now 


300  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    IV. 

lodged  there  for  the  night,  meaning  to  enter  the  capital  the 
next  day.     (John  xii.  12.) 

St.  John  tells  us  no  more  of  the  movements  of  Jesus  on 
this  occasion  with  precision ;  however,  this  one  date  will 
suffice  to  verify  his  narrative,  as  well  as  that  of  St.  Mark. 
Turn  we  then  to  the  latter,  who  gives  us  an  account  of 
the  proceedings  of  Jesus  immediately  before  his  crucifixion 
more  in  detail ;  or  rather,  enables  us  to  infer  for  ourselves 
what  they  were,  from  phrases  which  escape  from  him  :  and 
we  shall  find  that  the  two  narratives  arc  very  consistent 
with  respect  to  them,  though  it  is  very  evident  that  neither 
narrative  is  at  all  dressed  by  the  other,  but  that  both  are  so 
constructed  as  to  argue  independent  knowledge  of  the  facts 
in  the  Evangelists  themselves. 

In  Mark  xi.  1,  we  read,  "And  when  they  came  nigh  to 
Jerusalem,  unto  Bethphage  and  Bethany,  at  the  mount  of 
Olives,  he  sendeth  forth  two  of  his  disciples,  and  saith  unto 
them,  Go  your  way  into  the  village  over  against  you,"  &c. 
The  internal  evidence  of  this  whole  transaction  implies, 
that  the  disciples  were  dispatched  on  this  errand  the  morn- 
ing after  they  had  arrived  at  Bethany,  where  Jesus  had 
lodged  for  the  night,  and  not  the  evening  before,  on  the  in- 
stant of  his  arrival ;  the  events  of  the  day  being  much  too 
numerous  to  be  crowded  into  the  latter  period  of  time — the 
procuring  the  ass,  the  triumphant  procession  to  Jerusalem, 
the  visit  to  the  temple,  all  filling  up  that  day  ;  and  its  being 
expressly  said,  when  all  these  transactions  were  concluded, 
that  "the  even-tide  was  come,"  (ver.  11) ;  and  this  internal 
evidence  entirely  accords  with  the  direct,  assertion  of  St. 
John  (xii.  12),  that  it  was  "the  next  day."  Accordingly, 
this  day  closed  with  Jesus  "looking  round  about  upon  all 
things."  in  the  Temple  (ver.  11),  and  then  "  when  the  even- 
tide was  come,  going  out  unto  Bethany  with  the  twelve." 
This  then  was  the  second  day  Jesus  lodged  at  Bethany,  as 


i:ART    IV.  GOSPELS    AND    ACTS.  301 

we  gather  from  St.  Mark.  "  On  the  morrow,  as  they  were 
coining-  from  Bethany"  Jesus  cursed  the  fig-tree  (ver.  13) ; 
proceeded  to  Jerusalem  ;  spent  the  day,  as  before,  in  Jeru- 
salem and  the  temple,  casting  out  of  it  the  money-chang- 
ers ;  and  again, "  when  even  was  come  he  went  out  of  the 
city,"  (ver.  19,)  certainly  returning  to  Bethany;  for  though 
this  is  not  said,  the  fact  is  clear,  from  the  tenor  of  the  next 
paragraph.  This  was  the  third  day  Jesus  lodged  at  Beth- 
any, according  to  St.  Mark. 

"In  the  morning,  as  they  passed  by,  they  saw  the  fig- 
tree  dried  up  from  the  roots"  (ver.  20),  i.  e.  they  were  pro- 
ceeding by  the  same  road  as  the  morning  before,  and  there- 
fore from  Bethany,  again  to  spend  the  day  at  Jerusalem, 
and  in  the  temple  (ver.  27 ;  xii.  41) ;  Jesus  employing  him- 
self there  in  enunciating  parables  and  answering  cavils. 
After  this  "he  went  out  of  the  temple,"  (xiii.  1,)  to  return 
once  more,  no  doubt,  the  evening  being  come,  to  Bethany ; 
for  though  this  again  is  not  asserted,  it  is  clearly  to  be  in- 
ferred, which  is  better,  since  we  immediate!}'  afterwards  find 
Jesus  sitting  with  the  disciples,  and  talking  with  several  of 
them  privately,  "  on  the  mount  of  Olives"  (ver.  3),  which 
lay  in  his  road  to  Bethany.  This  was  the  fourth  dav  ac- 
cording to  St.  Mark.  St.  Mark  next  says,  "  After  two  days 
was  the  feast  of  the  Passover."  (xiv.  1.) 

This,  then,  makes  up  the  interval  of  the  six  days  since 
Jesus  came  to  Bethany,  according  to  St.  Mark,  which  tal- 
lies exactly  with  the  direct  assertion  of  St.  John,  that 
"Jesus  six  days  before  the  Passover  came  to  Bethany." 

But  how  unconcertcd  is  this  agreement  between  the 
Evangelists!  St.  John's  declaration  of  the  date  of  the  arri- 
val of  Jesus  at  Bethany  is  indeed  unambiguous ;  but  the 
corresponding  relation  of  St.  Mark,  though  proved  to  be  in 
perfect  accordance  with  St.  John,  lias  to  be  traced  with 
pains  and  difficulty  ;  some  of  the  steps  necessary  for  arriv- 

26 


302  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    IV 

ing  at  the  conclusion  altogether  inferential.  How  ex- 
tremely improbable  is  a  concurrence  of  this  nature  upon 
any  other  supposition  than  the  truth  of  the  incident  related, 
and  the  independent  knowledge  of  it  of  the  witnesses  :  and 
how  infallibly  would  that  be  the  impression  it  would  pro- 
duce on  the  minds  of  a  jury,  supposing  it  to  be  an  ingre- 
dient in  a  case  of  circumstantial  evidence  presented  to  them. 

2.  A  second  slight  coincidence,  which  offers  itself  to  our 
notice  on  the  events  of  Bethany,  is  the  following : — 

It  is  in  the  evening  that  the  Evangelists  represent  Jesus 
as  returning  from  the  city  to  Bethany:  "And  now  the 
even-tide  was  come,  he  went  out  unto  Bethany  with  the 
twelve."  (Mark  xi.  11.)  "And  when  even  was  come,  he 
went  out  of  the  city,"  (ver.  19,)  says  St.  Mark.  "And  he 
left  them,  and  went  out  of  the  city  unto  Bethany,  and 
lodged  there.  Now  in  the  morning  as  he  returned,"  &c. 
(Matth.  xxi.  17,)  says  St.  Matthew. 

St.  John  does  not  speak  directly  of  Jesus  going  in  the 
evening  to  Bethany.  But  there  is  an  incidental  expression 
iu  him  which  implies  that  such  was  his  own  conviction, 
though  nothing  can  be  less  studied  than  it  is.  For  he  tells 
us,  that  at  Bethany,  "they  made  him  a  supper?  deinvo¥, 
a  term,  as  now  used,  indicating  an  evening  meal.  Had 
St.  John  happened  to  employ  the  same  phrase  St.  Mark 
does  when  relating  this  same  event,  (xmuxetiiivov  uiiov  "as 
he  sat  at  meat,")  the  argument  would  have  been  lost;  as 
it  is,  t he  mention  of  the  meal  by  St.  John,  (who  takes  no 
notice  of  the  fact  that  Jesus  lodged  at  Bethany,  though  he 
spent  the  day  at  Jerusalem,)  and  such  meal  being  an  eve- 
ning meal,  is  tantamount  to  St.  Marks  statement,  that  he 
passed  his  evenings  in  this  village. 

3.  The  same  fact  coincides  with  several  other  particulars, 
though  our  attention  is  not  drawn  to  them  by  the  Evan- 
gelists.    It  is  obvious,  from  the  history,  that  the  danger  to 


PART    IV.  GOSPELS    AND    ACTS.  303 

Jesus  did  not  arise  from  the  multitude,  but  from  the  priests. 
The  multitude  were  with  him,  until,  as  I  have  said  in  a 
former  paragraph,  they  were  persuaded  that  he  assumed 
to  himself  the  character  of  God,  and  spake  blasphemy, 
when  they  turned  against  him  :  but  till  then  they  were  on 
his  side.  Judas  "  promised  and  sought  opportunity  to  be- 
tray him  in  the  absence  of  the  multitude."  (Luke  xxii.  6.) 
The  chief-priests  and  elders,  in  consulting  on  his  death, 
said,  "  not  on  the  feast-day,  lest  there  be  an  uproar  among 
the  people?  (Alatth.  xxvi.  5.)  Jesus  therefore  felt  himself 
safe,  nay,  powerful,  so  that  he  could  even  clear  the  temple 
of  its  profaners  by  force,  in  the  day ;  but  not  so  in  the 
night. — In  the  night,  the  chief-priests  might  use  stratagem; 
as  they  eventually  did ;  and  the  fact  appears  to  be,  that  the 
very  first  night  Jesus  did  not  retire  to  Bethany,  but  re- 
mained in  and  about  Jerusalem,  he  was  actually  betrayed 
and  seized.  There  is  a  consistency,  I  say,  of  the  most 
artless  kind  in  the  several  parts  of  this  narrative  ;  a  con- 
sistency, however,  such  as  we  have  to  detect  for  ourselves ; 
and  so  latent  and  unobtrusive,  that  no  forgery  could  reach  it.1 


XXVIII 

It  appears  to  me  that  there  is  a  coincidence  in  the  fol- 
lowing particulars,  relating  to  this  same  locality,  not  the 
less  valuable  from  being  in  some  degree  intricate  and  in- 
volved. 

1.  Llike  ix.  51. — "And  it  came  to  pass,  when  the  time  was 

come  that  he  should  be  received  up,  he  steadfastly  set. 

his  face  to  go  to  Jerusalem? 

Expressions  occur  in  the  remainder  of  this  and  in  the 

following  chapter,  which  show  that  the  mind  of  St.  Luke 

1  Several  of  the  thoughts  in  this  Number  are  suggested  to  me  by  Mr.  A. 
Johnson's  "  Christus  Crucifixus." 


304  THE    VERACITY    OP    THE  PART    IV 

was  contemplating  the  events  which  happened  on  this  jour- 
ney, though  he  does  not  make  it  his  business  to  trace  it 
step  by  step :  thus  (ver.  52),  "  And  they  went  and  entered 
into  a  village  of  the  Samaritans."  And  again  (ver.  57), 
"And  it  came  to  pass,  that  as  they  went  in  the  way,  a 
certain  man  said  unto  him,"  &c.  And  again  (x.  38),  "  And 
it  came  to  pass,  as  they  went,  that  they  entered  into  a 
certain  village:  and  a  certain  woman,  named  Martha, 
received  him  into  her  house.  And  she  had  a  sister  called 
Mary.;/  The  line  of  march,  therefore,  which  St.  Luke 
was  pursuing  in  his  own  mind  in  the  narrative,  was  that 
which  was  leading  Jesus  through  Samaria  to  Jerusalem ; 
and  in  the  last  of  the  verses  I  have  quoted,  he  brings  him 
to  this  "  certain  village,"  which  he  does  not  name,  but  he 
tells  us  it  was  the  abode  of  Martha  and  Mary. 

Accordingly,  on  comparing  this  passage  with  John  (xi.  1), 
we  are  led  to  the  conclusion,  that  the  village  was  Bethany  ; 
for  it  is  there  said,  that  Bethany  "  was  the  town  of  Mary 
and  her  sister  Martha." 

But  on  looking  at  St.  Mark's  account  of  a  similar  journey 
of  Jesus,  for  probably  it  was  not  the  same,1  we  find  that  the 
preceding  stage  which  he  made  before  coming  to  Bethany 
was  from  Jericho:  (Mark  x.  46.)  "And  they  came  to 
Jericho :  and  as  he  went  out  of  Jericho  with  his  disciples 
and  a  great  number  of  people,"  &c.  And  then  it  follows 
(xi.  1),  "And  when  they  came  nigh  to  Jerusalem,  unto 
Bethphage  and  Bethany?  &c.  This,  therefore,  brings  us 
to  the  same  point  as  St.  Luke.  Thus,  to  recapitulate  :  we 
learn  from  St.  Luke,  that  Jesus,  in  a  journey  from  Galilee 
to  Jerusalem,  arrived  at  the  village  of  Martha  and  Mary. 
We  learn  from  St.  John,  that  this  village  was  Bethany. 
And  we  learn  from  St.  Mark,  that  the  last  town  Jesus 

1  See  Luke  xiii.  32;  xvii.  11;  xviii.  31 ;  where  a  subsequent  journey  is 
perhaps  spoken  of! 


PART    IV.  GOSPELS    AND    ACTS.  305 

left  before  he  came  to  Bethany,  on  a  similar  journey,  if  not 
the  same,  was  Jericho. 

Now  let  us  turn  once  more  to  St.  Luke,  (x.  30,)  and  we 
shall  there  discover  Jesus  giving  utterance  to  a  parable  on 
this  occasion,  which  is  placed  in  immediate  juxtaposition 
with  the  history  of  his  reaching  Bethany,  as  though  it  had 
been  spoken  just  before. '  For,  as  soon  as  it  is  ended,  the 
narrative  proceeds,  <!  Now  it  came  to  pass,  as  they  went, 
that  he  entered  into  a  certain  village :  and  a  certain 
woman  named  Martha  received  him  into  her  house,"  (x. 
38.)  And  what  was  this  parable  ?  That  of  "  a  certain 
man  who  went  down  from  Jerusalem  to  Jericho,  and  fell 
among  thieves,"  &c.  It  seems,  then,  highly  probable,  that 
Jesus  was  actually  travelling  from  Jericho  to  Jerusalem^ 
(Bethany  being  just  short  of  Jerusalem),  when  he  delivered 
it.  "What  can  be  more  like  reality  than  this  ?  Yet  how 
circuitously  do  we  get  at  our  conclusion  ! 

2.  Nor  is  even  this  all.  The  parable  represents  a  priest 
and  Levite  as  on  the  road.  This  again  is  entirely  in  keep- 
ing with  the  scene  :  for  whether  it  was  that  the  school  of 
the  prophets  established  from  old  at  Jericho1  had  given  a 
sacerdotal  character  to  the  town  ;  or  whether  it  was  its 
comparative  proximity  to  Jerusalem,  that  had  invited  the 
priests  anpl  Levites  to  settle  there  ;  certain  it  is  that  a  very 
large  portion  of  the  courses  that  waited  at  the  temple  re- 
sided at  Jericho,  ready  to  take  their  turn  at  Jerusalem 
when  duty  called  them  ;2  so  that  it  was  more  than  prob- 
able that  Jesus,  on  coming  from  Jericho  to  Jerusalem,  on 
this  occasion,  with  hia  .  would  meet  many  of  this 
order.  How  vivid  a  coloring  of  truth  does  all  this  give  to 
the  fact  of  the  parable  having  been  spoken  as  St.  Luke 
says ! 

3.  Nay  more  still — I  can  believe  that  there  may  be  dis- 

i  2  Kings  ii.  5.  2  See  Lightfoot,  Vol.  11.  p.  45,  fol. 

26* 


306  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    IV. 

covered  a  reason  coincident  with  the  circumstances  of  the 
time,  in  Jesus  choosing  to  imagine  a  Samaritan  for  the 
benefactor  at  this  particular  moment — .for  it  had  only  been 
shortly  before,  at  least  it  was  upon  this  same  journey,  that 
James  and  John  had  proposed,  when  the  Samaritans 
would  not  receive  him,  to  call  down  fire  from  heaven  and 
consume  them,  (Luke  ix.  54.)  Could  the  spirit  they  were 
of  be  more  gracefully  rebuked  than  thus?  Again,  how 
real  is  all  this  ! 


XXIX. 

John  xviii.  10. — "  Then  Simon  Peter  having  a  sword  drew 
it,  and  smote  the  high-priest's  servant,  and  cut  off  his 
right  ear.      The  servant's  name  was  MalchusP 
15. — "  And  Simon  Peter  followed  Jesus,  and  so  did  another 
disciple:   that   disciple  was  known  unto  the  Jiigh 
priest,  and  went  in  with  Jesus  into  the  palace  of  the 
high-priest." 
1G. — "  But  Peter  stood  at  the  door  without.     Then  went 
out  that  other  disciple,  which  was   known  unto  the 
high-priest,  and  spake  unto  her  that  kept  the  door, 
and  brought  in  Peter.''1 
In  my  present  argument,  it  will  be  needful  to  show,  in 
the  first  instance,  that  "  the  disciple  who  was  known  unto 
the  high-priest,"  mentioned  in  ver.   15,  was  probably  the 
Evangelist  himself.    This  I  conclude  from  three  considera- 
tions : — 

1.  From    the    testimony   of  the    fathers,    Chrysostom, 
Theophylaot,  and  Jerom.1 

2.  From  (lie  circumstance  that  St.  John  often  unques- 
tionably speaks  of  himself  in  the  third  person  in  a  similar 

1  Sec  Ltmlncr's  History  of  the  Apostles  and  Evangelists,  ch.  ix. 


PART  IV.  GOSPELS  AND  ACTS  307 

manner.  Thus,  chap.  xx.  2,  "Then  she  runneth  and 
cometh  to  the  disciple  whom  Jesus  loved ;  and  ver.  3, 
li  Peter  therefore  went  forth,  and  that  other  disciple.n 
The  like  phrase  is  repeated  several  times  in  the  same 
chapter  and  elsewhere. 

3.  Moreover,  it  may  be  thought,  as  Bishop  Middlcton 
has  argued,  that  St.  John  has  a  distinctive  claim  to  the 
title  of  :'  the  other  disciple,"  (6  (Mo;  ftadtjr^s,  not  '•'  another," 
as  our  version  has  it,)  where  St.  Peter  is  the  colleague  :  for 
that  a  closer  relation  subsisted  between  Peter  and  John 
than  between  ahy  other  of  the  disciples.  They  constantly 
act  together.  Peter  and  John  are  sent  to  prepare  the  last 
Passover  (Luke  xxii.  S).  Peter  and  John  run  together  to 
the  sepulchre.  John  apprizes  Peter  that  the  stranger  at 
the  sea  of  Tiberias  is  Jesus  (John  xxi.  7).  Peter  is  anx- 
ious to  learn  of  Jesus  what  is  to  become  of  John  (ver.  21). 
After  the  ascension  they  are  associated  together  in  all  the 
early  history  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles. 

4.  The  narrative  of  the  motions  of  "  that  disciple  who 
was  known  unto  the  high-priest,"  his  coming  out  and 
going  in,  is  so  express  and  circumstantial,  that  it  bears 
every  appearance  of  having  been  written  by  the  party 
himself.  Nor  in  fact  do  any  other  of  the  Evangelists  men- 
tion a  syllable  about  u  that  other  disciple ;"  they  tell  us, 
indeed,  that  Peter  did  enter  the  high-priest's  house,  but 
they  take  no  notice  of  the  particulars  of  his  admission,  nor 
how  it  was  effected,  nor  of  any  obstacles  thrown  in  the 
way. 

For  these  reasons,  I  understand  the  disciple  known  unto 
the  high-priest  to  have  been  St.  John.  My  argument  now 
stands  thus.  The  assault  committed  by  Peter  is  mentioned 
by  all  the  Evangelists,  but  the  name  of  the  servant  is  given 
by  >$t.  John  only.  How  does  this  happen?  Most  natu- 
rally ;  for  it  seems  by  some  chance  or  other  St.  John  was 


308  THE    VERACITY    OP    THE  PART    IV. 

known  not  only  unto  the  high-priest,  but  also  to  his  house- 
hold— that  the  servants  were  acquainted  with  him,  and  he 
with  them,  since  he  was  permitted  to  enter  into  the  high- 
priest's  house,  whilst  Peter  was  shut  out,  and  no  sooner 
did  he  "speak  unto  her  that  kept  the  door,"  than  Peter 
was  admitted.  So  again,  in  further  proof  of  the  same 
thing,  when  another  of  the  servants  charges  Peter  with 
being  one  of  Christ's  disciples,  St.  John  adds  a  circum- 
stance peculiar  to  himself,  and  marking  his  knowledge  of 
the  family,  that  "  it  icas  his  kinsman  whose  ear  Peter 
cut  off.'' 

These  facts,  I  conceive,  show  that  St.  John  (on  the  sup- 
position that  St.  John  and  "  the  other  disciple"  are  one 
and  the  snme)  was  personally  acquainted  with  the  servants 
of  the  high-priest.  How  natural,  therefore,  was  it.  that 
in  mentioning  such  an  incident  as  Peter's  attack  upon  one 
of  those  servants,  he  should  mention  the  man  by  name, 
and  the  "  servant's  name  was  Malchus ;"  whilst  the 
other  Evangelists,  to  whom  the  sufferer  was  an  individual 
in  whom  they  took  no  extraordinary  interest,  were  satisfied 
with  a  general  designation  of  him,  as  "  one  of  the  servants 
of  the  high-priest." 

This  incident' also,  in  some  degree,  though  not  in  the 
same  degree  perhaps  as  certain  others  which  have  been 
mentioned,  supports  the  miracle  which  ensues.  For  if  the 
argument  shows  that  the  Evangelists  arc  uttering  the 
truth  when  they  say  that  such  an  event  occurred  a?  the 
blow  with  i!i  •  -word — if  it  shows  that  flare  actually 
such  a  blow  struck  -  then  is  there  not  additional  ground 
ft  i  believing  that  they  continue  to  tell  the  truth,  when 
they  say  in  the  same  passage  that  the  effects  of  the  blow 
were  miraculously  removed,  and  that  the  ear  was  healed  / 

I  am  aware  that  there  are  those  who  argue  for  the  su- 
perior rank  and  station  of  St.  John,  from  his  being  known 


PART  IV.         GOSPELS  AND  ACTS.  309 

unto  the  high-priest ;  and  who  may,  therefore,  think  him 
degraded  by  this  implied  familiarity  with  hie  servants. 
Suffice  it  however  to  say, — that,  as  on  the  one  hand,  to  be 
known  to  the  high-priest  does  not  determine  that  he  was 
his  equal,  so,  on  the  other,  to  be  known  to  bis  servants 
does  not  determine  that  he  was  not  their  superior ;  further- 
more, that  the  relation  in  which  servants  stood  towards 
their  betters  was,  in  ancient  times,  one  of  much  less  dis- 
tance than  at  present ;  and,  lastly,  that  the  Scriptures 
themselves  lay  no  claim  to  dignity  of  birth  for  this  Apostle, 
when  they  represent  of  him  and  of  St.  Peter,  (Acts  iv.  13,) 
that  Annas,  and  the  elders,  after  hearing  their  defence, 
"  perceived  them  to  be  unlearned  and  ignorant  men." 


XXX. 

John  xviii.  36. — "  Jesus  answered,  My  kingdom  is  not  of 
this  world:  if  my  kingdom  were  of  this  world,  then 
would  my  servants  fight,  that  I  should  not  be  de- 
livered to  the  Jews." 
Nothing  could  have  been  more   natural  than  for  his 
enemies  to  have   reminded  our  Lord,  that  in  one  instance 
at  lea*4,  and  that  too  of  very  recent  occurrence,  his  ser- 
vants did  fight.     Indeed,  Jesus  himself  might  here  be 
almost  thought  to  challenge  inquiry  into  the  assault  Peter 
had   so  lately  committed   upon   the  servant  of  the  high- 
priest.     Assuredly  there  was  no  disposition  on. the  part  of 
his  accusers  to  spare  him.     The  council  sought  for  witness 
against  Jesus,  and  where  could  it  be   found  more  readily 
than  in  the  high-priest's  own  house  ?     Frivolous  and  un- 
:  mmled  calumnies  of  all  sorts  wefe  brought  forward,  which 
agreed  not  together  ;  but  this  act  of  violence,  indisputably 
committed  by  one  of  his  companions  in  his  Master's  cause, 


310  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    IV. 

and,  as  they  would  not  have  scrupled  to  assert,  under  his 
Master's  eye,  is  altogether  and  intentionally,  as  it  should 
seem,  kept  out  of  sight. 

The  suppression  of  the  charge  is  the  more  remarkable, 
from  the  fact,  that  a  relation  of  Malchus  was  actually 
present  at  the  time,  and  evidently  aware  of  the  violence 
which  had  been  done  his  kinsman,  though  not  quite  able 
to  identify  the  offender.  "  One  of  the  servants  of  the  high- 
priest,  being'his  kinsman  whose  ear  Peter  cutoff,  said,  Did 
I  not  see  thee  in  the  garden  with  him  ?"  (ver.  26.)  Surely 
nothing  could  have  been  more  natural  than  for  this  man 
to  be  clamorous  for  redress. 

Had  the  Gospel  of  St.  Luke  never  come  down  to  us,  it 
would  have  remained  a  difficulty,  (one  of  the  many  diffi- 
culties of  Scripture  arising  from  the  conciseness  and  de- 
sultoiy  nature  of  the  narrative,)  to  have  accounted  for  the 
suppression  of  a  charge  against  Jesus,  which  of  all  others 
would  have  been  the  most  likely  to  suggest  itself  to  his 
persecutors,  from  the  offence  having  been  just  committed, 
and  from  the  sufferer  being  one  of  the  high-priest's  own 
family  ;  a  charge  moreover  which  would  have  had  tbe  ad- 
vantage of  being  founded  in  truth,  and  would  therefore 
have  been  far  more  effective  than  accusations  which  could 
not  be  sustained.  Let  us  hear,  however,  St.  Luke.1  He 
tells  us,  and  he  only,  that  when  the  blow  had  been  struck. 
Jesus  said,  "  Suffer  ye  thus  far  :  and  ha  touched  his  car 
and  healed  him.u — (xxii.  51.) 

The  miracle  satisfactorily  explains  the  suppression  of 
the  charge — to  have  advanced  it  would  naturally  have  ltd 
to  an  investigation  that  would  have  more  than  frustrated 
the  malicious  purpose  it  was  meant  to  serve.  It  would 
have  proved  too  much.  It  might  have  furnished  indeed 
an  argument  against  the  peaceable  professions  of  Jesus's 
party,  but,  at  the  same  time,  it  would  have  made  manifest 


PART    IV.  GOSPELS   AN1>  ACTS.  311 

his  own  compassionale  nature,  submission  to  the  laws, 
and  extraordinary  powers.  Pilate,  who  sought  occasion  to 
release  him,  might  have  readily  found  in  it  a  circumstance 
so  well  calculated  to  convince  him  of  the  innocence  of  the 
prisoner,  and  of  his  being  (what  he  evidently  suspected  and 
feared)  something  more  than  human. 


XXXI 

John  xx.  4. — "So  they  ran  both  together:  and  the  other 
disciple  did  outrun  Peter,  and  came  first  to  the  sep- 
ulchre. 
5. — "  And  he  stooping  down,  and  looking  in,  saw  the  linen 

clothes  lying  ;  yet  went  he  not  in. 
6. — "  Then  comelh  Simon  Peter  following  him,  and  went 

into  the  sepidchre,  and  seeth  the  linen  clothes  lie. 
7. — "  And  the  napkin,  that  was  about  his  head,  not  lying 
with  the  linen  clothes,  but  wrapped  together  in  a  place 
by  itself. 
8. — "  Then  went  in  also  that  other  disciple,  which  came 
first  to  the  sepulchre." 
How  express  and  circumstantial  is  this  narrative  !    How 
difficult  it  is  to  read  it  and  doubt  for  a  moment  of  its  per- 
fect truth  !    My  more  immediate  concern  however  with  the 
passage  is  this,  that  it  affords  two  coincidences,  certainl)'' 
very  trilling  in  themselves,  but  still  signs  of  veracity: — 
1.  St.  John  outran  St.  Peter.     It  is   universally  agreed 
by  ecclesiastical  writers  of  antiquity,  that  John   was  the 
youngest  of  all  the  Ap'ostles.     That  Peter  was  at  this  time 
past  the  vigor  of  his  age,  may  perhaps  be  inferred  from  an 
expression  in  the  twenty-first  chapter  of  St.  John^-"  Ver- 
ily, verily,  I  say  unto  thee,"  says  Jesus  to  Peter,  "  when 
thou   wast    young,  thou   girdest    thyself,    and  walkedst 


312  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART.    IV. 

whither  thou  wouldest :  but  when  thou  shalt  be  old,  thou 
shalt  stretch  forth  thy  hands,  and  another  shalt  gird  thee, 
and  carry  thee  whither  thou  wouldest  not." — ver.  18.  Or 
(what  may  be  more  satisfactory)  there  being  every  reason 
to  believe  that  St.  John  survived  St.  Peter  six  or  seven  and 
thirty  years,1  it  almost  necessarily  follows  that  he  must 
have  been  much  the  younger  man  of  the  two,  since  the 
term  of  St.  Peter's  natural  life  was  probably  not  very  much 
forestalled  by  his  martyrdom.2  Accordingly,  when  they 
ran  both  together  to  the  sepulchre,  it  was  to  be  expected 
that  John  should  outrun  his  more  aged  companion,  and 
come  there  first. 

I  do  not  propose  this  as  a  new  light,  but  I  am  not  aware 
that  it  has  been  brought  so  prominently  forward  as  it  de- 
serves. An  incident  thus  trivial  and  minute  disarms  sus- 
picion. The  most  sceptical  cannot  see  cunning  or  con- 
trivance in  it :  and  it  is  no  small  point  gained  over  such 
persons,  to  lead  them  to  distrust  and  re-examine  their  bold 
conclusions.  This  little  fact  may  be  the  sharp  end  of  the 
wedge  that  shall  by  degrees  cleave  their  doubts  asunder. 
Seeing  this,  they  may  by-and-by  "  see  greater  things  than 
these."  But  this  is  not  all : — for,  2dly,  though  John  came 
first  to  the  sepulchre,  he  did  not  venture  to  go  in  till  Peter 
set  him  the  example.  Peter  did  not  pause  "  to  stoop 
down"  and  "  look  in,"  but  boldly  entered  at  once — he  was 
not  troubled  for  fear  of  seeing  a  spirit,  which  was  probably 
the  feeling  that  withheld  St.  John  from  entering,  as  it  was 
the  feeling  which,  on  a  former  occasion,  caused  the  dis- 
ciples (Mark  xiv.  20)  to  cry  out.  Peter  was  anxiously 
impatient  to  satisfy  himself  of  the  truth  of  the  women's 
report,  and  to  meet  once  more  his  crucified   Master  :  all 

1  See  Lardner's  History  of  the  Apostles  and  Evangelists,  ch.  ix.  sect.  6. 
and  ch.  xviii.  sect.  5. 
8  Consult  2  Peter  i.  14,  ard  John  xxi.  18. 


PART    IV.  GOSPELS    AND    ACTS.  313 

other  considerations  were  with  him  absorbed  in  this  one. 
Now  such  is  precisely  the  conduct  we  should  have  expect- 
ed from  a  man,  who  seldom  or  never  is  offered  to  our  no- 
tice in  the  course  of  the  New  Testament,  (and  it  is  very 
often  that  our  attention  is  directed  to  him,)  without  some 
indication  being  given  of  his  possessing  a  fearless,  spirited, 
and  impetuous  character.  Slight  as  this  trait  is,  it  marks 
the  same  individual  who  ventured  to  commit  himself  to 
the  deep  and  "  walk  upon  the  water,"  whilst  the  other 
disciples  remained  in  the  boat ;  who  "  drew  his  sword  and 
smote  the  high-priest's  servant,"  whilst  they  were  con- 
founded and  dismayed ;  who  "  girt  his  fisher's  coat  about 
him  and  cast  himself  into  the  sea"  to  greet  his  Master 
when  he  appeared  again,  whilst  his  companions  came  in  a 
little  ship,  dragging  the  net  with  fishes  ;  who  was  ever 
most  obnoxious  to  the  civil  power,  so  that  when  any  of  the 
disciples  are  cast  into  prison,  there  are  we  sure  to  find  St. 
Peter.  (See  Acts  v.  18,  29 ;  xii.  3  ;  xvi.  25.)  Again,  I 
say,  I  cannot  imagine  that  designing  persons,  however 
wary  they  might  have  been,  however  much  upon  their 
guard,  could  possibly  have  given  their  fictitious  narrative 
this  singular  air  of  truth,  by  the  introduction  of  circum- 
stances so  unimportant,  yet  so  consistent  and  harmonious. 


XXXII. 

The  Gospel  of  St.  John  contains  no  history  whatever  of 
the  Ascension  of  Jesus ;  indeed,  the  narrative  terminates 
before  it  comes  to  that  point.  Yet  there  are  passages  in 
it  from  which  we  may  incidentally  gather  that  the  ascen- 
sion was  considered  by  him  as  a  notorious  fact.  Passages 
which  perfectly  coincide  with  the  direct  description  of  thai 
event,  contained  in    \.d  ;  i.  3—1 3. 

/ 


314  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART  IT. 

Thus,  John  iii.  13. — "  And  no  man  hath  ascended  up  to 
heaven,  but  he  I  hat  came  down  from  heaven,  even  the 
Son  of  man  which  ia  in  heaven." 
Again,  vi.  62. — "  What  and  if  ye  shall  see  the  Son  of  man 

ascend  up  where  he  was  before." 
Again,  xx.  17. — "Jesus  saith  unto  her.  Touch  me  not;  for 
I  am  not  yet  ascended  to  my  Father  :  but  go  to  my 
brethren,  and  say  unto  them,  1  ascend  unto  my  Fa- 
ther,  and  your  Father ;  and  to  my  God,  and   your 
God." 
Had  the  Gosp3l  of  St.  John  been  the  only  portion  of  the 
New  Testament  which  had  descended  to  our  times,  and  all 
record  of  the  ascension  had  perished,  these  casual  allusions 
to  it  might  have  been  lost  upon  us  ;  but  when  coupled  with 
such  record,  a  record  quite  independent  of  the  Gospel  of  St. 
John,  they  convey  to  us,  far  more  strongly  than  any  ac- 
count he  might  have  given  of  it  in  detail  could  have  done, 
the  testimony  of  that  Apostle  to  the  truth  of  this  last  mar- 
vellous act.  of  the  marvellous  life  of  our  blessed  Lord  ;  and 
of  which  he  was  himself  a  spectator. 


XXXIII. 

There  is  a  difference  in  the  quarter  from  which  oppo- 
sition to  the  Gospel  of  Christ  proceeded,  as  represented  in 
the  Gospels  and  in  the  Acts,  most  characteristic  of  truth, 
though  most  unobtrusive  in  itself.  Indeed,  these  two  por- 
tions of  the  New  Testament  might  be  read  many  times 
over  without  the  feature  I  allude  to  happening  to  present 
itself. 

Throughout  the  Gospels,  the  hostility  to  the  Christian 
cause  manifested  itself  almost  exclusively  from  the  Phari- 
sees.    Jesus  evidently  considers  them  as  a  sect  systemati- 


PART    IV.  GOSPELS    AND    ACTS. 


315 


cally  adverse  to  it — "  Woe  unto  you,  Scribes  and  Pharisees, 
hypocrites.  Ye  are  the  children  of  them  which  killed  the 
prophets.  ....  Fill  ye  up  the  measure  of  your  fathers."1 
And  before  Jesus  came  up  to  the  last  passover,  "  the  chief 
priests  and  Pharisees"  we  read,  "gave  commandment, 
that,  if  any  man  knew  where  he  were,  he  should  show  it, 
that  they  might  take  him."8  And  that  when  Judas  pro- 
posed to  betray  him,  "he  received  a  band  of  men  and  olli 
cers  from  the  chief  priests  and  Pharisees:'*  On  the  other 
hand,  throughout  the  Acts,  the  like  hostility  is  discovered 
to  proceed  from  the  Sadducees.  Thus,  "And  as  they" 
(Peter  and  John)  "spake  unto  the  people,  the  priests  and 
thc  captain  of  the  Temple  and  the  Sadducees  came  upon 
them."4  And  again,  on  another  occasion,  "  The  high  priest 
rose  up,  and  all  that  were  with  him,  which  is  the  sect  of  the 
Sadducees,'  and  were  filled  with  indignation  ;  and  laid 
hands  on  the  apostles,  and  put  them  in  the  common  pri- 
son."5 And  again,  in  a  still  more  remarkable  case ;  when 
Paul  was  maltreated  before  Ananias,  and  there  was  danger, 
perhaps  to  his  life,  he  "  perceiving,"  we  read,  "that  the  one 
part  were  Sadducees,  and  the  other  Pharisees,  cried  out 
in  the  council,  Men  and  brethren,  i  am  a  Pharisee,  the  son 
of  a  Pharisee  f*  evidently  considering  the  Pharisees  now  to 
be  the  friendly  faction,  and  soliciting  their  support  against 
the  Sadducees,  whom  he  equally  regarded  as  a  hostile  one  ; 
nor  was  be  disappointed  in  his  appeal. 

Whence  then  this  extraordinary  change  in  the  relations 
of  these  parties  respectively  to  the  Christians?  No  doubt, 
because  the  doctrine  of  the  resurrettim  of  (he  dead,  which* 
before  Christ's  own  resurrection,  i.  e.  during  the  period 
comprised  in  the  Gospels,  had  been  so  far  from  dispersed  by 
the  disciples,  that  they  scarcely  knew  what  it  meant  (Mark 

i  Matth.  xxiii.  29,  32.  2  John  xi.  57.  3  lb.  xviii.  3. 

*  Acts  iv.  1.  5  Ib.v,  17.  ■   U>.  xxiiL  & 


316  THE    VERACITY    OF    TEIE  PART    IV. 

ix.  10),  had  now  become  a  leading-  doctrine  with  them ; 
as  anybody  may  satisfy  themselves  was  the  case  by  read- 
ing t lie  several  speeches  of  St.  Peter,  which  are  given  in 
die  early  chapters  of  the  Acts ;  in  each  and  all  of  which 
the  resurrection  is  a  prominent  feature — in  that  which  he 
delivers,  on  providing  a  successor  for  Judas  (Acts  i.  22).;  at 
the  feast  of  Penlicost  ( ii.  32) :  at  the  Beautiful  Gate  (iii.  12) ; 
the  next  day,  before  the  priests  (iv.  10) ;  again,  before  the 
council  (v.  31) ;  once  more,  on  the  conversion  of  Cornelius 
(x.  40).  The  coincidence  here  lies  in  the  Pharisees  and 
Sadducees  acting  on  this  occasion  consistently  with  their 
respective  tenets :  "  For  the  Sadducees  say  that  there  is  no 
resurrection,  neither  angel  nor  spirit:  but  the  Pharisees 
confess  both."1  The  undesignedness  cf  the  coincidence 
consists  in  its  being  left  to  the  readers  of  the  Gospels  and 
Acts  to  discover  for  themselves  that  there  was  this  change 
of  the  persecuting  sect  after  the  Lord's  resurrection,  their 
attention  not  drawn  to  it  by  any  direct  notice  in  the  docu- 
ments themselves. 


XXXIV. 

Acts  iv.  36. — "And  Joses,  who  by  the  Apostle  was  sur- 
named  Barnabas,  a  Levite,  and  of  the  country  of 
Cyprus,  having  land,  sold  it,  and  brought  the  money, 
and  hud  it  at  the  Apostles1  feet." 
[  have  often  thought  that  there  is  a  harmony  pervading 
everything  connected  with   Barnabas,  enough  in  itself  to 
stamp  the  Acts  (if  the  Apostles  as  a  history  of  perfect  fidel- 
ity.    In  the  verse  which  I  have  placed  at  the  head  of  this 
graph,  we  see  that  he  was  a  native  of  Cyprus  ;  a  cir- 

1  Acts  xxiii.  8. 


PART    IV.  GOSPELS    AND   ACTS.  317 

cumstance  upon  which  a  good  deal  of  what  I  have  to  say 
respecting  him  will  be  found  to  turn. 

1.  First  then,  we  discover  him  coming  forward  in  be- 
half of  Paul,  whose  conversion  was  suspected  by  the  disci- 
ples at  Jerusalem,  with  the  air  of  a  man  who  could  vouch 
for  his  sincerity,  by  previous  personal  knowledge  of  him. 
How  it  was  that  he  was  better  acquainted  with  the  Apostle 
than  the  rest,  the  author  of  the  Acts  does  not  inform  us. 
Cyprus,  however,  the  country  of  Barnabas,  was  usually 
annexed  to  Cilicia,  and  formed  an  integral  part  of  that 
province,  whereof  Tarsus,  the  country  of  Paul,  was  the 
chief  city.1     It  may  seem  fanciful,  however,  to  suppose  that 
at  Tarsus,  which  was  famous  for  its  schools  and  the  facil- 
ities it  afforded  for  education,2  the  two  Christian  teachers 
might  have  laid  the  foundation  of  their  friendship  in   the 
years  of  their  boyhood.     Yet  I  cannot  think  this  improba- 
ble.    That  Paul  collected  his  Greek  learning  (of  which  he 
had  no  inconsiderable  share)  in  his  native  place,  before  he 
was  removed  to  the  feet  of  Gamaliel,  is  very  credible ;  nor 
less  so,  that  Barnabas  should  have  been  sent  there  from 
Cyprus,  a  distance  of  seventy  miles  only,  as  to  the  nearest 
school  of  note  in  those  parts.     Be  that,  however,  as  it  may. 
what  could  be  more  natural  than  for  an   intimacy  to  be 
formed  between  them  subsequently  in  Jerusalem,  whither 
they  had  both  resorted?     They  were,  as  we  have  seen,  all 
but  compatriots,  and,  under  the  circumstances,  were  likely 
to  have  their  common  friends.     Neither  may  it  be  thought 
wholly  irrelevant  to  observe,  that  when  it  was  judged  safe 
for  Paul  to  return  from  Tarsus,  where  lie  had  been  living 
for  a  time  to  avoid  the  Greeks,  Barnabas  seized  the  oppor- 
tunity of  visiting  that  town  in  person,  "  to  seek  him,"  and 

i  Cicer.  Epist.  Familiar.     Lib.  i.  ep.  vii.     See  also  Maffei  Verona  Illus- 
trata,  Vol.  I.  p.   352. 

2  See  Wetstein  on  Acts  ix.  11. 

27* 


21S  THE    VERACITY   OF    THE  PART    IV. 

bring  him  to  Antioch.  A  journey  which,  as  it  does  not 
seem  to  be  necessary,  was  possibly  undertaken  by  Barna- 
bas partly  for  the  purpose  of  renewing-  his  intercourse  with 
his  early  acquaintance. 

2.  Again,  in  another  place  we  read,  "And  some  of  them 
were  men  of  Cyprus  and  Gyrene,  which,  when  they  were 
come  to  Antioch,  spake  unto  the  Grecians,  preaching  the 
Lord  Jesus.  And  the  hand  of  the  Lord  was  with  them : 
and  a  great  number  believed,  and  turned  unto  the  Lord. 
Then  tidings  of  these  things  came  unto  the  ears  of  the 
church  which  was  at  Jerusalem.  And  they  sent  forth 
Barnabas,  that  he  should  go  as  far  as  Antioch.''7  (Acts, 
ix.  20.)  Here  no  reason  is  assigned  why  Barnabas  should 
have  been  chosen  to  go  to  Antioch,  and  acquaint  himself 
with  the  progress  these  new  teachers  were  making  amongst 
the  Grecians;  but  we  may  observe,  that  "some  of  them 
were  men  of  Cyprus  ;"  and  having  learned  elsewhere  that 
Barnabas  was  of  that  country  also,  we  at  once  discover 
the  propriety  of  dispatching  him,  above  all  others,  to  con- 
fer with  them  on  the  part  of  the  church  at  Jerusalem. 

3.  Again,  when,  at  a  subsequent  period,  Paul  and  Bar- 
nabas went  forth  together  to  preach  unto  the  Gentiles,  we 
perceive  that  "they  departed  unto  Selcucia,  a) id  from 
thence  sailed  to  Cyprus."  (xiii.  4.)  And  further,  in  a 
second  journey,  after  Paul  in  some  heat  had  parted  com- 
pany  with  them,  we  read  that  Barnabas  and  Mark  again 
"sailed  unto  Cyprus."  (xv.  32.)  This  was  precisely 
what  we  might  expect.  Barnabas  naturally  enough  chose 
to  visit  his  own  laud  before  he  turned  his  steps  to  si  rangers. 
Yet  all  this,  satisfactory  as  it.  is  in  evidence  of  the  truth  of 
the  history,  we  are  left  by  the  author  of  the  Acts  of  the 
Apostles  to  gather  for  ourselves,  by  the  apposition  of  sev- 
eral perfectly  unconnected  passages. 

4.  Nor  is  this  all.     "And  sonic  days  after  (so  we  read, 


PART    IV.  GOSPELS    AND    ACTS.  319 

ch.  xv.)  Paul  said  unto  Barnabas,  Let  us  go  again  and 
visit  our  brethren  in  every  city  where  we  have  preached 
the  word  of  the  Lord,  and  see  how  they  do.  And  Barna- 
bas determined  to  take  with  them  John,  whose  surname 
was  Mark.  But  Paul  thought  not  good  to  take  him  with 
them,  who  departed  from  them  from  Po.inplujlia.  and 
went  not  with  them  to  the  work.  And  the  contention  was 
so  sharp  between  them,  that  they  departed  asunder  one 
from  another :  and  so  Barnabas  took  Mark,  and  sailed 
unto  Ci/jtr/is."1 

A  curious  chain  of  consistent  narrative  may  be  traced 
throughout  the  whole  of  this  passage.  The  cause  of  the 
contention  between  Paul  and  Barnabas  has  been  already 
noticed  by  Dr.  Paley ;  I  need  not  therefore  do  more  than 
call  to  my  reader's  mind  (as  that  excellent  advocate  of  the 
truth  of  Christianity  has  done)  the  parage  in  the  Epistle 
to  the  Colossians,  iv.  10.  where  it  is  casually  said,  that 
"  Marcus  teas  sister's  son  to  Barnabas'7 — a  relationship 
most  satisfactorily  accounting  for  the  otherwise  extraordi- 
nary pertinacity  with  which  Barnabas  takes  up  Mark's 
cause  in  this  dispute  with  Paul.  Though  anticipated  in 
this  coincidence,  I  was  unwilling  to  pass  it  over  in  silence, 
because  it  is  one  of  a  series  which  attach  to  the  life  of  Bar- 
nabas, and  render  it,  as  a  whole,  a  most  consistent  and 
complete  testimony  to  the  veracity  of  the  Acts. 

One  circumstance  more  remains  still  to  be  noticed.  Mark, 
it  seems,  in  the  former  journey,  ''departed  from  them  from 
Pamphvlia,  and  went  not  with  them  to  the  work."  How 
did  this  happen?  The  explanation,  I  think,  is  not  difficult. 
Paul  and  Barnabas  are  appointed  to  go  forth  and  preach. 
Accordingly  they  hasten  to  Seleucia,  the  nearest  sea-port 
to  Antioch,  where  they  were  staying,  and  taking  with  them 
John  or  Mark,  "sail  to  Cyprus"  (xiii.  4).  Since  Barna- 
bas was  a  Cypriote,  it  is  probable   that  his  nephew  Mark 


320  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    IV. 

was  the  same,  or,  at  any  rate,  that  he  had  friends  and  re- 
lations in  that  island.  His  mother,  it  is  true,  had  a  house 
in  Jerusalem,  where  the  disciples  met,  and  where  some  of 
them  perhaps  lodged  (xii.  12) ;  but  so  had  Mnason,  who 
was  nevertheless  of  Cyprus  (xxi.  16).  How  reasonable 
then  is  it  to  suppose,  that  in  joining  himself  to  Paul  and 
Barnabas  in  the  outset  of  their  journey,  he  was  partly  in- 
fluenced by  a  very  innocent  desire  to  visit  his  kindred,  his 
connections,  or  perhaps  his  birth-place,  and  that  having 
achieved  this  object,  he  landed  with  his  two  companions  in 
Pamphylia,  and  so  returned  forthwith  to  Jerusalem.  And 
this  supposition  (it  may  be  added)  is  strengthened  by  the 
expression  applied  by  St.  Paul  to  Mark,  "  that  he  went  not 
with  them  to  the  work" — as  if  in  the  particular  case  the 
voyage  to  Cyprus  did  not  deserve  to  be  considered  even  the 
beginning  of  their  labors,  being  more  properly  a  visit  of 
choice  to  kinsfolk  and  acquaintance,  or  to  a  place  at  least 
having  strong  local  charms  for  Mark. 


XXXV. 

Acts  vi.  I.  |  "  And  in  those  days,  when  the  number  of  the 
disciples  was  multiplied,  there  arose  a  murmuring  of 
the  Grecians  against  the  Hebrews,  because  their 
widows  were  neglected  in  the  daily  ministration. 

2. — "Then  the  twelve  called  the  multitude  of  the  disciples 
unto  them,  and  said,  It  is  not  reason  that  we  should 
leave  the  word  of  God,  and  serve  tables.  Wherefore. 
brethren,  look  ye  out  among  you  seven  men,  of  hon- 
est report,  full  of  the  Holy  Ghost  and  wisdom,  whom 
we  may  appoint  over  this  business. 

5. — "And  (he  saying  pleased  the  whole  multitude:  and 
they  chose  Stephen,  a  man  full  of  faith,  and  of  the 


PART    IV.  GOSPELS    AND   ACTS.  321 

Holy  Ghost,  and  Philip,  and  Prochorus,  and  Nicanor, 

and  Timon,  and  Parmenas,  and  Nicolas,  a  proselyte 

of  Antioch.:' 

In  this  passage,  I  perceive  a  remarkable  instance  of 

consistency  without  design.     There  is  a  murmuring  of  the 

Grecians  against  the  Hebrews,  on  account  of  what  they 

considered  an  unfair  distribution  of  the  alms  of  the  church. 

Seven  men  are  appointed  to  redress  the  grievance.     No 

mention  is  made  of  their  country  or   connections.     The 

multitude  of  the  disciples  is  called  together,  and  by  them 

the  choice  is  made.     No  other  limitation  is  spoken  of  in 

the  commission  they  had  to  fulfil,  than  that  the  men  should 

be  of  honest  report;  full  of  the  Holy  Ghost.    Yet  it  is  probable, 

(and  here  lies  the  coincidence,)  that  these  deacons  were  all 

of  the  party  aggrieved,  for  their  names  are  all  Grecian. 

It  is  difficult  to  suppose  this  accidental.  There  must 
have  been  Hebrews  enough  fitted  for  the  office.  Yet  Gre- 
cians alone  seem  to  have  been  appointed.  Why  this 
should  be  so,  St.  Luke  does  not  say,  does  not  even  hint. 
We  gather  from  him  that  the  Grecians  thought  themselves 
the  injured  party  ;  and  we  then  draw  our  own  conclusions, 
that  the  church  having  a  sincere  wish  to  maintain  har- 
mony, and  remove  all  reasonable  ground  of  complaint, 
chose,  as  advocates  for  the  Greeks,  those  who  would  natu- 
rally feel  for  them  the  greatest  interest,  and  protect  their 
rights  with  a  zeal  that  should  be  above  suspicion. 


XXXVI. 

Acts  xi.  26. — "And  the  disciples  were  called  Christians 
first  in  Antioch." 
The   mention  of  this  fact  as  a  remarkable  one,  and 
worthy  of  being  recorded,  is  natural,  and  coincides  with 


THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PAIIT    IV. 

the  circumstances  of  the  case  as  gathered  from  other  pas- 
sages of  the  Acts.  For  it  should  seem,  from  the  various 
phrases  and  circumlocutions  resorted  to  in  that  book,  by 
which  to  express  Christians  and  Christianity,  that  for  a 
long  time  no  very  distinctive  term  was  applied  to  either. 
We  read  of  "all  that  believed"  (ol  thotevovje;,  ii.  44);  of 
"  the  disciples"  (01  /uad>iTat}  vi.  1) ;  of  "  any  of  this  way," 
(ol  ?^  udov,  ix.  2) ;  and  again,  of  "  the  way  of  God"  (>}  toO 
Qeov  65bq.  xviii.  20) ;  or  simply  of  "  that  way"  (>}  odbg,  xix. 
9) ;  or  of  "  this  way"  («<3n]  ^  odbg,  xxii.  4.)  Indeed,  the 
name  Christian  occurs  but  in  two  other  places  in  the  New 
Testament  (Acts  xxvi.  28  ;  1  PeL  iv.  16.)  A  title  there- 
fore which  characterized  the  new  sect  succinctly  and  in  a 
word,  and  which  saved  so  much  inconvenient  and  ambigu- 
ous periphrases,  was  memorable ;  and  even  if  given  in  the 
first  instance  as  a  reproach,  was  sure  to  be  soon  adopted 
and  rendered  familiar.  On  the  supposition  that  the  book 
of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  was  a  fiction,  is  it  possible  to 
imagine,  that  this  unobtrusive  evidence  of  the  progress  of 
a  name  would  have  been  found  in  it  ?: 


XXXVII. 

Acts  xix.  19. — "  Many  of  them  also  which  used  curious 
arts  brought  their  books  together,  and  burned  them 
before  all  men  :  and  they  counted  the  price  of  them, 
and  found  it  fifty  thousand  pieces  of  silver." 
It  was  at  Ephesus  where  the  effect  of  St.  Paul's  min- 
istry was  thus  powerful — and  where,  therefore,  it  seems 
that  these  magical  arts  very  greatly  prevailed. 

Now  it  was  at  EpJiesus  that  Timothy  was  residing 

1  My  attention  was  ilrtuvn  to  this  coincidence,  by  a  passage  in  Bishop 
Pearson.     Minor  Theolog.  Works,  i.  p.  307. 


f>ART    IV.  "GOSPELS    AND    ACTS.  323 

when  St.  Paul  wrote  to  him,  '•'  But  evil  men  and  seducers 
(joi'jfg.  conjurers)  shall  wax  worse  and  worse,  deceiving 
and  being  deceived  (cheats  and  cheated);  but  continue 
thou  in. the  things  which  thou  hast  learned,"  &c.  (2  Tim. 
iii.  13.)  These  were  the  men  who  dealt  in  curious  arts — 
the  trade  of  the  place  in  such  impostures  not  having  alto- 
gether ceased,  it  should  seem,  when  a  bonfire  was  made 
of  the  books.1 


XXXVIII. 

Acts  xxiv.  23. — "  And  he  commanded  a  centurion  to 
keep  Paul,  and  to  let  him  have  liberty." 

Rather  "he  commanded  the  centurion,"  tcj;  SxawvTiiQx^. 

It  should  seem,  therefore,  that  St.  Luke  had  in  his  mind 
3ome  particular  centurion.  Is  there  anything  in  the  nar- 
rative which  would  enable  us  to  identify  him  ? 

It  will  be  remembered,  that  in  the  preceding  chapter 
(xxiii.  23,)  the  chief  captain  "  called  unto  him  txoo  centu- 
rions, saying,  Make  ready  two  hundred  soldiers  to  go  to 
I  'a'sarea,  and  horsemen  threescore  and  ten,  and  spearmen 
two  hundred,  at  the  third  hour  of  the  night ;  and  provide 
them  beasts  that  they  may  set  Paul  on,  and  bring  him  safe 
unto  Felix  the  governor." 

This  escort  having  arrived  with  their  prisoner  at  Anti- 
pairis  (ver.  32,)  divided  ;  the  infantry  returning  to  Jerusa- 
lem, and  of  course  the  centurion  who  commanded  them  ; 
the  horsemen  and  the  other  centurion  proceeding  with 
Paul  to  Caesarea. 

When,  therefore,  St.  Luke  tells  us  that  Felix  com- 
manded the  centurion  to  keep  Paul,  he  no  doubt  meant 

'  This  coincidence  is  suggested  by  Dr.  Burton's  Bampton  Lectures,  iv.  p.  103. 


324  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    IV. 

the  commander  of  the  horse  who  had  conveyed  him  to 
Caesarea  ;  whose  fidelity  having  already  experienced,  he 
consigned  to  him  this  further  trust. 

This  is  very  natural :  but  the  neglect  or  non-detection 
of  this  touch  of  truth  in  our  version,  shows  how  delicate  a 
thing  the  translation  of  the  Scripture  is  ;  and  how  favor- 
able to  the  evidence  of  its  veracity  is  the  strict  and  accu- 
rate, nay,  even  grammatical  investigation  of  it.1 


XXXIX. 

Acts  xxiv.  26. — "  He  (Felix)  hoped  also  that  money  should 
have  been  given  him  of  Paul,  that  he  might  loose 
him :  wherefore  he  sent,  for  him  the  oftener  and  com- 
muned with  him." 

It  is  observed  by  Lardner,'2  that  Felix  (it  might  be 
thought)  could  have  small  hopes  of  receiving  money  from 
such  a  prisoner  as  Paul,  had  he  not  recollected  his  telling 
him,  on  a  former  interview,  that  "after  many  years  he 
came  to  bring  alms  to  his  nation,  and  offerings." — Hence 
he  probably  supposed,  that  the  alms  might  not  yet  be  all 
distributed,  or  if  they  wore,  that,  a  public  benefactor  would 
soon  find  friends  to  release  him. 

The  observation  is  curious,  and  in  confirmation  of  its 
truth,  I  will  add,  that  the  personal  appearance  of  Paul, 
when  he  was  brought  before  Felix,  was  certainly  not  such 
as  would  give  the  governor  reason  to  believe  that  he  had 
wherewithal  to  purchase  his  own  freedom,  but  quite  the 
contrary.  For  a  passage  in  the  Acts,  (xxii.  28,)  certainly 
conveys  very  satisfactory,  though   indirect,  evidence,  that 

1  Bishop  Middleton,  on  the  Greek  Article,  p.  298,  finds  a  subject  for  phi- 
lology, hcte  a<Min,  where  I  find  one  for  evidence. 
-  Vol.  i.  p.  27.     8vo.  edition. 


PART  IV.  GOSPELS  AND  ACTS.  325 

the  Apostle  wore  poverty  in  his  looks  at  the  very  period  in 
question.  When  Lysias,  the  chief  captain  at  Jerusalem, 
had  been  apprized  that  he  was  a  Roman,  he  could  scarcely 
give  credit  to  the  fact;  and,  being  further  assured  of  it  by 
Paul  himself,  he  said,  "  With  a  great  sum  obtained  I  this 
freedom,"  manifestly  implying  a  suspicion  of  Paul's  ve- 
racity- whose  appearance  bespoke  no  such  means  of  pro- 
curing citizenship.  The  cupidity,  therefore,  of  Felix  was 
no  doubt  excited,  as  has  been  said,  by  recollecting  the 
errand  on  which  his  prisoner  had  come  so  lately  to  Jeru- 
salem. 

And  this,  moreover,  furnishes  the  true  explanation  of 
the  orders  which  Felix  (very  far  from  a  merciful  or  indul- 
gent officer)  gave  to  the  keeper  of  Paul,  "  to  let  him  have 
liberty,  and  to  forbid  none  of  his  acquaintance  to  min- 
ister or  conie  unto  him ;"  a  free  admission  of  his  friends 
being  necessary,  in  order  that  they  might  furnish  him  with 
the  ransom. 

It  is  true  that  there  is  no  coincidence  here  between  inde- 
pendent writers,  but  surely  every  unprejudiced  mind  must 
admit  that  there  is  an  extremely  nice,  minute,  and  unde- 
signed harmony  between  the  speech  of  Paul  and  the  sub- 
sequent conduct  of  Felix  ;  though  the  cause  and  effect  are 
so  far  from  being  traced  by  the  author  of  the  Acts,  that  it 
may  be  doubled  whether  he  saw  any  connection  subsist- 
ing between  them.  Surely,  I  repeat,  such  a  harmony  must 
convince  us  that  it  is  no  fictitious  or  forged  narrative  that 
we  are  reading,  but  a  true  and  very  accurate  detail  of  an 
actual  occurrence. 


XL. 

Acts  xxvii.  5. — "  And  when  we  had  sailed  over  the  sea  of 
Cihcia  and  Pamphylia,  we  came  to  Myra,  a  city  of 

28 


326 


THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  PART    IV, 


Lycia.      And  there  the  centurion  found  a  ship  of 

Alexandria  sailing  into  Italy." 
10. — "Sirs,  I  perceive  that  this  voyage  will  be  with  hurt 

and  much  damage,  not  only  of  the  lading  (toD  ydgwv) 

and  ship,  but  also  of  our  lives." 
38. — "  And  when  they  had  eaten  enough,  they  lightened 

the  ship,  and  cast  out  the  wheat  (t6v  aho>)  into  the  sea. 
It  has  been  remarked,  I'think  with  justice,  that  the  cir- 
cumstantial details  contained  in  this  chapter  of  the  ship- 
wreck cannot  be  read  without  a  conviction  of  their  truth. 
I  have  never  seen,  however,  the  following  coincidence  in 
some  of  these  particulars  taken  notice  of  in  the  manner  it 
deserves.  In  my  opinion  it  is  very  satisfactory,  and  when 
combined  with  a  paragraph  on  the  same  subject,  which 
will  be  found  in  the  Appendix,  (No.  XXIII.)  establishes 
the  fact  of  St.  Paul's  voyage  beyond  all  reasonable  doubt. 
The  ship  into  which"  the  centurion  removed  Paul,  and 
the  other  prisoners  at  Myra,  was  a  skip  of  Alexandria 
that  was  sailing  into  Italy.  It  was  evidently  a  merchant- 
vessel,  for  mention  is  made  of  its  lading.  The  nature  of 
the  lading,  however,  is  not  directly  stated.  It  was  capa- 
ble of  receiving  Julius  and  his  company,  and  was  bound 
right  for  them.  This  was  enough,  and  this  was  all  that 
St.  Luke  cares  to  tell.  Yet,  in  verse  38,  we  find,  by  the 
merest  chance,  of  what  its  cargo  consisted.  The  furniture 
of  the  ship,  or  its  "  tackling,"  as  it  is  called,  was  thrown 
overboard  in  the  early  part  of  the  storm  ;  but  the  freight 
was  naturally  enough  kept  till  it  could  be  kept  no  longer, 
and  then  we  discover,  for  the  first  time,  that  it  was  wheat 
— "  the  wheat  was  cast  into  the  sea." 

Now  it  is  a  notorious  fact  that  Rome  was  in  a  great 
measure  supplied  with  corn  from  Alexandria — that  in 
times  of  scarcity  the  vessels  coming  from  that  port  were 
watched   with    intense   anxiety  as  they  approached   the 


PART  IV.  GOSPELS    AND    ACTS.  327 

coast  of  Italy1— that  they  were  of  a  size  not  inferior  to  our 
line  of  battle  ships,2  a  thing  by  no  means  usual  in  the  ves- 
sels of  that  day— and  accordingly  that  such  an  one  might 
well  accommodate  the  centurion  and  his  numerous  party, 
in  addition  to  its  own  crew  and  lading. 

There  is  a  very  singular  air  of  truth  in  all  this.     The 
several  detached  verses  at  the  head  of  this  Number  tell  a 
continuous  story,  but  it  is  not  perceived  till  they  are  brought 
together.     The  circumstances  drop  out  one  by  one  at  in- 
tervals in  the  course  of  the  narrative,  unarranged,  unpre- 
meditated,   thoroughly   incidental;    so   that   the   chapter 
might  be   read   twenty  times,  and  their  agreement  with 
one  another  and  with  contemporary  history  be  still  over- 
looked.    I  confess,  it  seems  to  me  the  most  unlikely  thing 
in  the  world,  that  a  mere  inventor  of  St.   Paul's  voyage 
should  have  been  able  to  arrange  it  all,  try  how  he  would. 
It  is  possible  that  he  might  have  affected  some  circum- 
stantial detail,  and  so  have  made  St.  Paul  and  his  com- 
panions change  their  ship  at  Myra ;  he  might  have  said 
that  it  was  a  ship  of  Alexandria  bound  for  Italy  ;  but  that 
he  should  have  added,  some  thirty  verses  afterwards,  and 
then  quite  incidentally,  that  its  cargo  was  wheat,  a  fact  so 
curiously  agreeing  with  his  former  assertion  that  the  ves- 
sel was  Alexandrian  and  was  sailing  to  Italy,  argues  a 
subtlety  of  invention  quite  incredible.     But  if  the  account 
of  the  voyage,  as  far  as  relates  to  the  change  of  ship,  the 
tempest,  the  disastrous  consequences,  &c.  is  found,  on  being 
tried  by  a  test  which  the  writer  of  the  Acts  could  never  have 
contemplated,  to  be  an  unquestionable  fact,  how  can  the 
rest,  which   does  not  admit  of  the  same  scrutiny,  be  set 
aside  as  unworthy  of  credit  ? — for  instance,  that  Paul  act- 
ually foretold  the  danger— that  again,  in  the  midst  of  it, 

»  See  Sueton.  Nero.  $.  45.  2  See  Wetstein,  Acts  xxrii.  6. 


328  THE    VERACITY;    ETC.  PART    IV. 

he  foretold  the  final  escape,  and  that  an  angel  had  declared 
to  him  God's  pleasure,  that  for  his  sake  not  a  soul  should 
perish  ?  I  see  no  alternative  but  to  receive  all  this,  nothing 
doubting;  unless  we  consider  St.  Luke  to  have  mixed  up 
fact  and  fiction  in  a  manner  the  most  artful  and  insidious. 
Yet  who  can  read  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  and  come  to 
euch  a  conclusion  ? 


APPENDIX, 


CONTAINING 


UNDESIGNED  COINCIDENCES  BETWEEN  THE  GOS- 
PELS AND  ACTS,  AND  JOSEPHUS. 


Tt  will  not  be  out  of  place,  if  to  a  work  which  has  had 
for  its  object  to  establish  the  veracity  of  the  Scriptures  in 
general,  and  in  the  last  Part,  that  of  the  Gospels  and  Acts 
in  particular,  on  the  evidence  of  undesigned  coincidences 
found  in  them,  when  compared  with  themselves  or  one 
'  another,  I  subjoin  as  a  cognate  argument,  some  other  in- 
stances of  undesigned  coincidence  between  those  latter 
writings  and  Josephus.  The  subject  has  been  treated,  but 
not  exhausted,  by  Lardner  and  Paley  ;  the  latter  of  whom 
indeed  did  not  profess  to  do  more  than  epitomize  that  part 
of  the  "  Credibility  of  the  Gospel  history"  which  considers 
the  works  of  the  Jewish  historian.  Josephus  was  born  a.  d. 
37,  and  therefore  must  have  been  long  the  contemporary 
of  some  of  the  Apostles.  For  my  purpose  it  matters  little, 
or  nothing,  whether  we  reckon  him  a  believer  in  Christi- 
anity or  not ;  whether  he  had,  or  had  not,  seen  the  records 
of  the  Evangelists  ;  since  the  examples  of  agreement  be- 
tween him  and  them,  which  I  shall  produce,  will  be  suck 
as  are  evidently  without  contrivance,  the  result  of  veracity 
in  both. 
If  we  allow  him  to  be  a  Christian,  if  we  even  allow  him 
28* 


330  THE    VERACITY    OP    TKTE  APPEND; 

to  have  seen-  the  writings  of  the  Evangelists,  he  will  never- 
theless be  an  independent  witness,  as  far  as  he  goes,  pro- 
vided his  corroborations  of  the  Gospel  be  clearly  unpremed- 
itated and  incidental.  In  short,  he  will  then  be  received 
like  St.  Mark  or  St.  John,  as  a  partisan  indeed  ;  but  yet  as 
a  partisan  who,  upon  cross-examination,  confirms  both  his 
own  statements  and  those  of  his  colleagues.. 


Before  I  bring  forward  individual  examples  of  coinci- 
dence between  Josephus  and  the  Evangelists,  I  cannot  help 
remarking  the  effect  which  (he  writings  of  the  former  have, 
when  taken  together  and  as  a  ivhole,  in  convincing  us  of 
the  truth  of  Gospel  history.  No  man,  I  think,  could  rise 
from  a  perusal  of  the  latter  books  of  the  Antiquities,  and 
the  account  of  the  Jewish  War,  without  a  very  strong  im- 
pression, that  the  state  of  Judaea,  civil,  political  and  moral, 
as  far  as  it  can  be  gathered  from  the  Gospels  and  Acts  of 
the  Apostles,  is  portrayed  in  these  latter  with  the  greatest 
accuracy,  with  the  strictest  attention,  to  all  the  circum- 
stances of  the  place  and  the  times.  It  is  impossible  to  im- 
part this  conviction  to  my  readers  in  a  paragraph  ;  the  na- 
ture of  the  case  does  not  admit  of  it ;  it  is  the  result  of  a 
thousand  little  facts,  which  it  would  be  difficult  to  detach, 
from  the  general  narrative,  and  which  considered  separately 
might  seem  frivolous  and  fanciful.  We  close  the  pages  of 
Josephus  with  the  feeling  that  we  hav*  been  reading  of  a- 
country,  which,  for  many  years  before  its  final  fall,  had 
been  the  scene  of  miserable  anarchy  and  confusion.  Eve- 
rywhere we  meet  with  open  acts  of  petty  violence,  or  the 
secret  workings  of  plots,  conspiracies,  and  frauds ; — the  laws 
ineffectual,  or  very  partially  observed,  and  very  wretchedly 


APPEND.  GOSPELS    AND    ACTS.  331 

administered : — oppression  on  the  part  of  the  rulers ; 
amongst  the  people,  faction,  discontent,  seditions,  tumults ; 
— robbers  infesting  the  very  streets,  and  most  public  places 
of  resort,  wandering  about  in  arms,  thirsting  for  blood  no 
less  than  spoil,  assembling  in  troops  to  the  dismay  of  the 
more  peaceable  citizens,  and  with  difficulty  put  down  by 
military  force ; — society,  in  fact,  altogether  out  of  joint. 
Such  would  be  our  view  of  the  condition  of  Judaea,  as  col- 
lected from  Josephus. 

Now  let  us  turn  to  the  New  Testament,  which,  without 
professing  to  treat  about  Judaea  at  all,  nevertheless  by  glimp- 
ses, by  notices  scattered,  uncombined,  never  intended  for 
such  a  purpose,  actually  conveys  to  us  the  very  counterpart 
of  the  picture  in  Josephus.  For  instance,  let  us  observe  the* 
character  of  the  parables  ;  stories  evidently  in  many  cases, 
and  probably  in  most  cases,  taken  from  passing  events,  and 
adapted  to  the  occasions  on  which  they  were  delivered.  In 
how  many  may  be  traced  scenes  of  disorder,  of  rapine,  of 
craft,  of  injustice,  as  if  such  scenes  were  but  too  familiar  u> 
the  experience  of  those  to  whom  they  were  addressed  ! 
We  hear  of  a  "  man  going  down  from  Jerusalem  to  Jericho, 
and  falling  among  thieves,  which  stripped  him  of  his  rai- 
ment, and  wounded  him,  and  departed,  leaving  him  half 
dead."  (Luke  x.  30.)  Of  another,  who  planted  a  vine- 
yard, and  sent  his  servants  to  receive  the  fruits:  but  the 
'  husbandmen  took  those  servants,  and  beat  one,  and  killed 
another,  and  stoned  another."  (Matth.  xxi.  35.)  Of  a 
i:  judge  which  feared  not  God  nor  regarded  man,"  and  who 
avenged  the  widow  only  "  lest  by  her  continual  coming 
she  should  weary  him."  (Luke  xviii.  2.)  Of  a  steward 
"  who  was  accused  unto  the  rich  man  of  having  wasted  his 
goods,"  and  who,  by  taking  further  liberties  with  his  mas- 
ter's property,  secured  himself  a  retreat  into  the  houses  of 
his  lord's  debtors,  u  when  he  should  be  put  oui  of  the  stew- 


332  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  APPEND. 

ardship."  (Luke  xvi.  1.)  Of -the  coming  of  the  Son  of 
man.  like  that  of  a  thief  in  the  night,"  whose  approach  was 
to  be  watched,  if  the  master  would  ':  not  suffer  his  house  to  - 
be  broken  up."  (Matth.  xxiv.  43.)  Of  a  "  kingdom  divided 
against  itself  being  brought  to  desolation.1'  Of  a  "  city  or 
house  divided  against  itself  not  being  able  to  stand."  (Matth. 
xiL  25.)  Of  the  necessity  of  "  binding  the  strong  man"  be- 
fore "entering  into  his  house  and  spoiling  his  goods." 
(Matth.  xii.  29.)  Of  the  folly  of  "  laying  up  for  ourselves 
treasures  upon  earth,  where  moth  and  rust  doth  corrupt, 
and  where  thieves  break  through  and  steal."  (Matt.  vi.  19.) 
Of  the  enemy  who  had  maliciously  sown  tares  amongst  his 
neighbor's  wheat,  "and  went  his  way."  (Matth.  xiii.  25.) 
Of  the  man  who  found  a  treasure  in  another's  field,  and 
cunningly  sold  all  that  he  had,  and  "  bought  that  field." 
(xiii.  44.)  These  instances  may  suffice.  Neither  is  it  to 
the  parables  only  that  we  must  look  for  our  proofs.  Many 
historical  incidents  in  the  Gospels  and  Acts  speak  the  same 
language.  Thus  when  Jesus  would  "have  entered  into  a 
village  of  the  Samaritans,"  they  would  not  receive  him, 
upon  which  his  disciples,  James  and  John,  who  no  doubt 
partook  in  the  temper  of  the  times,  proposed  "  that  fire  should 
be  commanded  to  come  down  from  heaven  and  consume 
them."  (Luke  ix.  52.)  Again,  when  Jesus  had  offended 
the  people  of  Nazareth  by  his  preaching,  they  made  no 
scruple  "  of  rising  up  and  thrusting  him  out  of  the  city,  and 
leading  him  unto  the  brow  of  the  hill  whereon  the  city  was 
built,  that  they  might  cast  him  down  headlong,"  (Luke  iv. 
19) ;  and,  on  another  occasion,  after  he  had  been  speaking 
in  the  temple  at  Jerusalem,  "  the  Jews  took  up  stones  to 
stone  him,"  but  he  "  escaped  out  of  their  hand."  (John  x. 
31.)  Again,  we  are  told  of  certain  "  Galikcans  whose  blood 
Pilate  had  mingled  with  their  sacrifices."  (Luke  xiii.  1.) 
And  when  our  Lord  was  at  last  seized,  it  was  u  by  a  great 


APPEND.  GOSPELS    AND   ACTS-;  333 

multitude  with  swords  and  staves,"  (Matth.  xxvi.  47,)  as 
in  a  country  where  nothing  but  brute  force  could  avail  to 
carry  a  warrant  into  execution.  So  again,  Barabbas,  whom 
the  Jews  would  have  released  instead  of  Jesus,  was  one 
"  who  lay  bound  with  them  that  had  made  insurrection 
with  him,  who  had  committed  murder  in  the  insurrection." 
(Mark  xv.  7.)  And  when  he  was  at  length  crucified,  it 
was  between  two  thieves. 

Let  us  trace  the  times  somewhat  further,  and  we  shall 
discover  no  amendment,  but  rather  the  contrary;  as  we 
learn  from  Joseph  us  was  the  case  on  the  nearer  approach 
to  the  breaking  out  of  the  war.  Thus  Stephen  is  tumultu- 
ously  stoned  to  death.  (Acts  viii.  58.)  And  "Saul  made 
havoc  of  the  church,  entering  into  every  house,  and  taking 
men  and  women,  committed  them' to  prison."  (viii.  3.)  But 
when  Saul's  own  turn  came  that  he  should  be  persecuted, 
what  a  continued  scene  of  violence  and  outrage  is  presented 
to  us  !  Turn  we  to  the  21st,  22nd,  and  23rd  chapters  of 
the  Acts.  It  might  be  Josephus  that  is  speaking  in  them: 
Paul,  on  his  coming  to  Jerusalem,  is  obliged  to  have  re- 
course to  a  stratagem  to  conciliate  the  people,  because  u  the 
multitude  would  needs  come  together,  for  they  would  hear 
that  he  was  come."  Still  it  was  in  vain.  A  hue  and  cry 
is  raised  against  him  by  a  few  persons  who  had  known  him 
m  Asia,  and  forthwith  "all  the  city  is  moved,  and  the  peo- 
ple run  together  and  take  Paul,  and  draw  him  out  of  the 
temple."  The  Roman  garrison  gets  under  arms  and  hast- 
ens to  rescue  Paul :  but  still  is  it  needful  that  "  he  be  borne 
of  the  soldiers,  for  the  violence  of  the  people."  He  makej 
his  defence.  They,  however,  "  cry  out,  and  cast  off  their 
clothes,  and  throw  dust  in  the  air."  He  is  brought  before 
the  council,  and  the  high-priest  commands  them  that  stand 
by  him  to  strike  him  on  the  mouth."  He  now,  with  much 
dexterity,  divides  his  enemies,  by  declaring  himself  a  Phar- 


"334  THE    VERACITY    OF   THE  APPEND. 

isee  and  a  believer  in  the  resurrection.  This  was  enough 
to  set  them  again  at  strife ;  for  then  there  arose  a  dissen- 
sion between  the  Pharisees  and  Sadducees, — and  such  was 
its  fury,  that  "  the  captain,  fearing  Paul  should  be  pulled 
in  pieces  by  them,  commands  his  soldiers  to  go  down  and 
take  him  by  force  from  among  them."  No  sooner  is  he 
rescued  from  the  multitude,  than  forty  persons  and  more 
"  bind  themselves  by  a  curse  to  kill  him"  when  he  should 
be  next  brought  before  the  council.  Intelligence,  of  this 
plot,  however,  is  conveyed  to  the  captain  of  the  guard,  who 
determines  to  send  him  to  Ceesarea,  to  Felix  the  governor. 
The  escort  necessary  to  attend  this  single  prisoner  to  his 
place  of  destination  is  no  less  than  four  hundred  and  sev- 
enty men,  horse  and  foot,  and,  as  a  further  measure  of 
safety  and  precaution,  they  are  ordered  to  set  out  at  the 
third  hour  of  the  night.  All  these  things,  I  say.  are  in 
strict  agreement  with  the  state  of  Judeca  as  it  is  represented 
by  Josephus.  And  it  might  be  added,  that  independently 
of  such  consideration,  an  argument  for  the  truth  of  the 
Gospels  and  Acts  results  from  the  harmony  upon  this  point 
which  prevails  throughout  them  all:  a  circumstance  which 
I  might  have  dwelt  upon  in  the  former  section,  but  which 
it  will  be  enough  to  have  noticed  here. 

But  further,  a  perusal  of  the  writings  of  Josephus  leaves 
another  impression  upon  our  minds  that  there  was  a  very 
considerable  intercourse  between  Judwa  and  Rome.  To 
Rome  we  find  causes  and  litigations  very  constantly  re- 
ferred— thither  are  the  Jews  perpetually  resorting  in  search 
of  titles  and  offices — there  it  is  that  they  make  known  their 
grievances,  explain  their  errors,  supplicate  pardons,  set  forth 
their  claims  to  favor,  and  return  their  thanks.  Neither  are 
there  wanting  passages  in  the  New  Testament  which 
would  lead  us  to  the  same  conclusion ;  rather  however 
casually,  by  allusion,  by  an  expression   incidentally  pre- 


APPEND.  GOSPELS    AND    ACTS  335 

senting  itself,  than  by  any  direct  communication  on  the 
subject.  Hence  may  we  discover,  for  instance,  the  pro- 
priety of  that  phrase  so  often  occurring  in  the  parables  and 
elsewhere,  of  men  going  for  various  purposes  uinto  a  far 
countryP 

Thus  we  read  that  "  the  Son  of  man  is  as  a  man  taking 
a  far  journey,  who  left  his  house  and  gave  authority  to 
his  servants,  and  to  every  man  his  work,  and  commanded 
the  porter  to  watch."  (Mark  xiii.  34.)  And  again,  that  a 
certain  nobleman  went  into  a  far  country  to  receive  for 
himself  a  kingdom,  and  to  return.  (Luke  xix.  12.)  And 
again,  that' the  prodigal  son,  "gathered  all  together,  and 
took  Ins  journey  into  a  far  country,  and  there  wasted  his 
substance  in  riotous  living."  (Luke  xv.  13).  And  again, 
that  "a  certain  householder  planted  a  vineyard,  and  hedged 
it  round  about,  and  digged  a  winepress  in  it,  and  built  a 
tower,  and  let  it  out  to  husbandmen,  and  went  into  a  far 
country."  (Matth.  xxi.  33.)  Moreover,  it  is  probable  that 
this  political  relationship  of  Judaea  to  Rome,  the  seat  of 
government,  from  whence  all  the  honors  and  gainful  posts 
were  distributed,  suggested  the  use  of  those  metaphors, 
which  abound  in  the  New  Testament,  of  the  "kingdom  of 
heaven/'  of  "seeking  the  kingdom  of  heaven,"  of  "giving 
•the  kingdom  of  heaven,"  and  the  like.  All  I  mean  to 
affirm  is  this,  that  such  allusions  and  such  figures  of  speech 
would  very  naturally  present  themselves  to  a  Teacher  sit- 
uated as  the  Gospel  represents  Jesus  to  'have  been — and 
therefore  go  to  prove  that  such  representation  is  the  truth. 


II. 

Matth.  ii.  3.— "When  Herod  the  king  had   heard  these 
tilings,  he  was  troubled,  and  all  Jerusalem  with  him. 


THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  APPEND. 

And  when  he  had  gathered  all  the  chief  priests  and 
scribes  of  the  people  together,  he  demanded  of  them 
where  Christ  should  be  born." 

Nor  was  he  yet  satisfied;  for  he  "privily  called  the 
wise  men.  and  inquired,  of  them  diligently  what  time  the 
star  appeared."  (ver.  7.)  And  when  they  did  not  return 
from  Bethlehem,  as  he  expected,  he  seems  to  have  been 
still  more  apprehensive,  a  exceeding  wroth."  (ver.  16.) 

Such  a  transaction  as  this  is  perfectly  agreeable  to  the 
character  of  Herod,  as  we  may  gather  it  from  Josephus. 
He  was  always  in  fear  for  the  stability  of  his  throne,  and 
anxious  to  pry  into  futurity  that  he  might  discover  whether 
k  was  likely  to  endure. 

Thus  we  read  in  Josephus  of  a  certain  Essene,  Manahem 
by  name,  who  had  foretold,  whilst  Herod  was  yet  a  boy, 
that  he  was  destined  to  be  a  king.  Accordingly,  "  when 
he  was  actually  advanced  to  that  dignity,  and  in  the  plen- 
itude of  his  power,  he  sent  for  Manahem  and  inquired  of 
him  how  long  he  should  reign  ?  Manahem  did  not  tell 
him  the  precise  period.  Whereupon  he  questioned  him 
further,  whether  he  should  reign  ten  years  or  not?  He  re- 
plied, Yes,  twenty,  nay,  thirty  years  ;  but  he  did  not  as- 
sign a  limit  to  the  continuance  of  his  empire.  With  these 
answers  Herod  was  satisfied,  and  giving  Manahem  his 
hand,  dismissed  him,  and  from  that  time  he  never  ceased 
to  honor  all  the  Essenes."  (Antiq.  xv.  20.  §  5.) 


III. 

Matth.  ii.  22. — "  But  when  he  heard  that  Archelaus  did 
reign  in  Judea  in  the  room  of  his  father  Herod,  he 
was  afraid  to  go  thither." 
On  the  death  of  Herod,  Joseph  was  commanded  to  re- 


APPEND.  GOSPELS  AND  ACTS.  337 

turn  to  the  land  of  Israel,  and  "  he  arose  and  took  the 
young  child''  and  went.  However,  before  he  began  his 
journey,  or  whilst  he  was  yet  in  the  way,  he  was  told  that 
Archelaus  did  reign  in  Judaea  in  the  room  of  his  father 
Herod  ;  on  which  he  was  afraid  to  go  thither.  Archelaus, 
therefore,  must  have  been  notorious  for  his  cruelty  (it 
should  seem)  very  soon  indeed  after  coming  to  his  throne. 
Nothing  short  of  this  could  account  for  the  sudden  resolu- 
tion of  Joseph  to  avoid  him  with  so  much  speed. 

Now  it  is  remarkable  enough,  that  at  the  very  first 
passovcr  after  Herod's  death,  even  before  Archelaus  had 
yet  had  time  to  set  out  for  Rome  to  obtain  the  ratifica- 
tion of  his  authority  from  the  emperor,  he  was  guilty  of  an 
act  of  outrage  and  bloodshed,  under  circumstances  above 
all  others  fitted  to  make  it  generally  and  immediately 
known.  One  of  the  last  deeds  of  his  father,  Herod,  had 
been  to  put  to  death  Judas  and  Matthias,  two  persons  who 
had  instigated  some  young  men  to  pull  down  a  golden 
eagle,  which  Herod  had  fixed  over  the  gate  of  the  Temple, 
contrary,  as  they  conceived,  to  the  law  of  Moses.  The 
hapless  fate  of  these  martyrs  to  the  law  excited  great  com- 
miseration at  the  Passover  which  ensued.  The  parties, 
however,  who  uttered  their  lamentations  aloud  were 
silenced  by  Archelaus,  the  new  king,  in  the  following 
manner : — 

<:  He  sent  out  all  the  troops  against  them,  and  ordered 
the  horsemen  to  prevent  those  who  had  their  tents  outside 
the  Temple  from  rendering  assistance  to  those  who  were 
within  it,  and  to  put  to  death  such  as  might  escape  from 
the  foot.  The  cavalry  slew  nearly  three  thousand  men, 
the  rest  betook  themselves  for  safety  to  the  neighboring 
mountains.  Then  Archelaus  commanded  proclamation  to 
be  made,  that  the)  should  all  retire  to  their  own   homes. 

29 


338  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  APPEND. 

So  they  went  away,  and  left  the  festival  out  of  fear  lest 
somexcliai  worse  should  ensue"     (Antiq.  xvii.  9.  §  3.) 

We  must  bear  in  mind,  that  at  the  Passover  Jews  from 
all  parts  of  the  world  were  assembled  ;  so  that  any  event 
which  occurred  at  Jerusalem  during  that  great  feast  would 
be  speedily  reported  on  their  return  to  the  countries  where 
they  dwelt.  Such  a  massacre,  therefore,  at  such  a  season, 
would  at  once  stamp  the  character  of  Archelaus.  The 
fear  of  him  would  naturally  enough  spread  itself  wherever 
a  Jew  was  to  be  found  ;  and,  in  fact,  so  well  remembered 
was  this  first  essay  at  governing  the  people,  that  several 
years  afterwards  it  was  brought  against  him  with  great 
effect  on  his  appearance  before  Caesar  at  Rome. 

It  is  the  more  probable  that  this  act  of  cruelty  inspired 
Joseph  with  his  dread  of  Archelaus,  because  that  prince 
could  not  have  been  much  known  before  he  came  to  the 
throne,  never  having  had  any  public  employment,  or,  in- 
deed, future  destination,  like  his  half-brother,  Antipater, 
whereby  he  might  have  discovered  himself  to  the  nation 
at  large.1 


IV. 

Matth.  xvii.  24. — "And  when  they  were  come  to  Caper- 
naum,   they   that    received   tribute-money   came   to 
Peter,  and  said,  Doth  not  your  master  pay  tribute? 
He  saith,  Yes." 
The  word  which  is  translated  tribute-money  is  in  the 
original  "the  didrucltma.''  of  which  indeed  notice  is  given 
in  the  margin  of  our  version  ;  and  it  is  worthy  of  remark, 
that  this  tax  seems  not   to  have   been  designated  by  any 

1  Lardner  briefly  alludes  to  this  transaction,  but  has  not  made  the  best  of 
his  argument. — Vol.  I.  p.  14.  8vo.  ed. 


APPEND.  GOSPELS  AND  ACTS.  339 

general  name,  such  for  instance  as  tribute,  custom,  &c, 
but  actually  had  the  specific  appellation  of  "  the  didrach- 
ma." Thus  Jesephus  writes:  "  Nisibis  too  is  a  city  sur- 
rounded by  the  same  river  (the  Euphrates) ;  wherefore  the 
Jews,  trusting  to  the  nature  of  its  position,  deposited  there 
the  didrachma.  which  it  is  customary  for  each  individual 
to  pay  to  God  ;  as  well  as  their  other  offerings." — (Antiq, 
xviii.  10.  §  1.) 

There  is  something  which  indicates  veracity  in  the 
Evangelist,  to  be  correct  in  a  trifle  like  this.  He  makes 
no  mistake  in  the  sum  paid  to  the  Temple,  nor  does  he 
express  himself  by  a  general  term,  such  as  would  have 
concealed  his  ignorance,  but  hits  upon  the  exact  payment 
that  was  made,  and  the  name  that  was  given  it. 

It  may  be  added,  that  St.  Matthew  uses  the  word 
didrachma  without  the  smallest  explanation,  which  is  not 
the  case,  as  we  have  seen,  with  Josephus  ;  yet  the  argu- 
ment of  Jesus  which  follows  would  be  quite  unintelligible 
to  those  who  did  not  know  for  whose  service  this  tribute- 
money  was  paid.  It  is  evident,  therefore,  that  the  Evan- 
list  thought  there  could  be  no  obscurity  in  the  term  ;  that 
it  was  much  too  familiar  with  his  readers  to  need  a  com- 
ment. Now  the  use  of  it  probably  ceased  with  the  des- 
truction of  the  Temple  ;  after  which  but  few  years  would 
elapse  before  some  interpretation  would  be  necessary,  more 
especially  as  the  term  itself  does  not  in  the  least  imply  the 
nature  of  the  tax,  but  only  its  individual  amount.  The 
undesigned  omission  of  everything  of  this  kind,  on  the 
part  of  St.  Matthew,  pretty  clearly  proves  the  Gospel  to 
have  been  written  before  the  Temple  was  destroyed. 


340  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  APPEND. 


V. 


Matth.  xxii.  23.— "  The  same  day  came  to  him  the  Sad- 
ducees,  which  say  that  there  is  no  resurrection,  and 
asked  him,"  &c. 

It  is  very  unusual  to  find  in  St.  Matthew  a  paragraph 
like  this,  explanatory  of  Jewish  opinions  or  practices.  In 
general  it  is  quite  characteristic  of  him,  and  a  circumstance 
which  distinguishes  him  from  the  other  Evangelists,  that 
lie  presumes  upon  his  readers  being  perfectly  familiar  with 
Judeea  and  all  that  pertains  to  it.  St.  Mark,  in  treating 
the  same  subjects,  is  generally  found  to  enlarge  upon  them 
much  more,  as  though  conscious  that  he  had  those  to  deal 
with  who  were  not  thoroughly  conversant  with  Jewish 
affairs. 

Compare  the  following  parallel  passages  in  these  two 
Evangelists. 

Matth.  ix.  14. — "  Then  came  to  him  the  disciples  of 
John,  saying,  Why  do  we  and  the  Pharisees  fast  oft,  but 
ihy  disciples  fast  not  V 

Mark  ii.  18. — "  And  the  disciples  of  John  and  of  the 
Pharisees  used  to  fast :  and  they  come  and  say  unto  him, 
Why  do  the  disciples  of  John  and  of  the  Pharisees  fast, 
but  thy  disciples  fast  Dot?" 

Matth.  xv.  1. — :i  Then  came  to  Jesus  Scribes  and  Phar- 
isees, which  were  of  Jerusalem,  saying,  Why  do  thy  dis- 
ciples transgress  the  tradition  of  the  Elders?  for  they  wash 
not  their  hands  when  they  eat  bread.  But  he  answered 
and  said  unto  them."  &c. 

Mark  vii. — "Then  came  together  unto  him  t lie  Phari- 
sees, and  certain  of  the  Scribes,  which  came  from  Jerusa- 
lem. And  when  they  saw  some  of  his  disciples  eat  bread 
with  defiled,  that  is  to  say,  with  unwashen  hands,  they 


APPEND.  GOSPELS    AND    ACTS.  341 

found  fault.  For  the  Pharisees,  and  all  the  Jeivs,  except 
they  wash  their  hands  •oft,  eat  not,  holding"  the  tradition 
of  the  Elders.  And  when  they  come  from  the  market, 
except  they  wash,  they  eat  not.  And  many  other  things 
there  be,  which  they  have  received  to  hold,  as  the  wash- 
ing of  cups,  and  pots,  brazen  vessels,  and  of  tables. 
Then  the  Pharisees  and  Scribes  asked  him,  "Why  walk  not 
thy  disciples  according  to  the  tradition  of  the  Elders,  but 
eat  bread  with  unwashen  hands?"  etc. 

Matth.  xxvii.  62. — "  Now  the  next  day  that  followed  the 
day  of  the  Preparation,  the  Chief  Priests  and  Pharisees 
came  together,''  &c. 

Mark  xv.  42. — "  And  now  when  the  even  was  come,  be- 
cause it  was  the  Preparation,  that  is,  the  day  before  the 
Sabbath?  &c. 

These  examples  (to  which  many  more  might  be  added) 
may  suffice  to  show  the  manner  of  St.  Matthew  as  com- 
pared with  that  of  another  of  the  Evangelists  ;  that  it 
dealt  little  in  explanation.  How  then  does  it  happen  that 
in  the  instance  before  us  he  deviates  from  his  ordinary,  al- 
most his  uniform,  practice;  and  whilst  writing  for  Jews, 
thinks  it  necessary  to  inform  them  of  so  notorious  a  tenet 
of  the  Sadducces  (for  such  we  might  suppose  it)  as  their 
disbelief  'in  a  resurrection  ?  Would  not  his  Jewish  readers 
have  known  at  once,  and  on  the  mere  mention  of  the  name 
of  this  sect,  that  he  was  speaking  of  persons  who  denied 
that  doctrine  1 

Let  us  turn  to  Josephns.  (Antiq.  xviii.  1.  §  4.)  and  we 
BhaH  find  him  throwing  some  light  upon  our  inquiry. 

"  The  doctrine  of  the  Sadducees  is,  that  the  soul  and 
body  perish  together.  The  law  is  all  that  they  are  con- 
cerned to  observe.  They  consider  it  commendable  to  con- 
trovert the  opinions  of  masters  even  of  their  own  school 
of  philosophy.     This   doctrine,   however,    has  not  many 

29* 


342 


THE    VERACITY    OP    THE  APPEND 


followers,  but  those  "persons  of  the  highest  rank — next 
to  nothing  of  public  business  falls  into  their  hands."' 
Thus,  we  see,  it  was  very  possible  for  the  people  of  Judaea, 
though  well  acquainted  with  most  of  the  local  peculiarities 
of  their  country,  to  be  ignorant,  or  at  least,  ill-informed,  of 
the  dogmas  of  a  sect,  insignificant  in  numbers,  removed 
from  them  by  station,  and  seldom  or  never  brought  into 
contact  with  them  by  office  ;  and  therefore  that  St.  Matthew 
was  not  wasting  words,  when  he  explained  in  this  instance, 
though  in  so  many  other  instances  he  had  withheld  ex- 
planation.1 


VI. 


Matth.  xxvi.  5. — "  But  they  said,  Not  on  the  feast  day, 
lest  there  be  an  uproar  among  the  people." 

I  have  already  alluded  to  the  insubordinate  condition 
of  Judcea  in  general,  about  the  period  of  our  Lord's  min- 
istry. We  have  here  an  example  of  the  feverish  and  irri- 
table state  of  the  capital  itself,  in  particular,  during  the 
feast  of  the  Passover. 

"  The  feast  of  the  Passover,"  says  Josephus,  (who  re- 
lates an  event  that  happened  some  few  years  after  Christ's 
death,)  "  being  at  hand,  wherein  it  is  our  custom  to  use 
unleavened  bread,  and  a  great  multitude  being  drawn  to- 
gether from  all  parts  to  the  feast,  Cumanus  (the  governor) 
fearing  that  some  disturbance  might  fall  out  amongst 
them,  commands  one  cohort  of  soldiers  to  arm  themselves 
and  stand  in  the  porticoes  of  the  Temple,  to  suppress 
any  riot  which  might  occur  ;  and  this  precaution  the 

i  Sec  Hug's  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament,  Vol.  n.  p.  7.  Transla- 
tion by  the  Rev.  D.  G.  Wuit. 


APPEND.  GOSPELS   AND   ACTS.  343 

governors  of  Judcea  before  him  had  adopted.11 — (Antiq. 
xx.  4.  §  3.) 

In  spite,  however,  of  these  prudent  measures,  a  tumult 
arose  on  this  very  occasion,  in  which,  according  to  Jose- 
phus,  twenty  thousand  Jews  perished. 


VII. 

Mark  v.  1. — "  And  they  came  over  unto  the  other  side  of 
the  sea,  into  the  country  of  the  Gadarenes"  &c. 

11. — "Now  there  were  nigh  unto  the  mountains  many 
swine  feeding. 

Here  it  might  at  first  seem  that  St.  Mark  had  been 
betrayed  into  an  oversight — for  since  swine  were  held  ir> 
abhorrence  by  the  Jews  as  unclean,  how  (it  might  be 
asked)  did  it  happen  that  a  herd  of  them  were  feeding  on 
the  side  of  the  sea  of  Tiberias  ? 

The  objection,  however,  only  serves  to  prove  yet  more 
the  accuracy  of  the  Evangelist,  and  his  intimate  knowl- 
edge of  the  local  circumstances  of  Judea ;  for  on  turning 
to  Josephus,  (Antiq.  xvii.  13.  §  4,)  we  find  that  "  Tunis 
Stratonis,  and  Sebaste,  and  Joppa,  and  Jerusalem,  were 
made  subject  to  Archelaus,  but  that  Gaza,  Gadara,  and 
Hippos,  being  Grecian  cities,  were  annexed  by  Caesar  to 
Syria."  This  fact,  therefore,  is  enough  to  account  for 
swine  being  found  amongst  the  Gadarenes. 


VIII. 

Mark  vi.  21. — "And  when  a  convenient  day  was  come, 
that  Herod  on  his  birth- day  made  a  supper  to  his 
lords,  high  captains,  and  chief  estates  of  Galilee  ; 


344 


THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  APPEND. 


and  when  the  daughter  of  (.he  said  Herodias  came  in, 
and  danced,"  &c. 
It  is  curious  and  worthy  of  remark;  that  a  feast,  under 
•exactly  similar  circumstances,  is  incidentally  described  by 
Joseph  us,  as  made  by  Herod,  the  brother  of  Herodias,  and 
successor  of  this  prince  in  his  government.  "  Having 
made  a  feast  on  his  birth-clay,  (writes  Josephus,)  when 
all  under  his  command  partook  of  the  mirth,  he  sent 
for  Silas,"  (an  officer  whom  he  had  cast  into  prison  for 
taking  liberties  with  him,)  and  ';  offered  him  his  freedom 
and  a  seat  at  the  banquet."  (Antiq.  xix.  7.  §  1.)  This,  I 
say,  is  a  coincidence  worth  notice,  because  it  proves  that 
these  birth-day  feasts  were  observed  in  the  family  of 
Herod,  and  that  it  was  customary  to  assemble  the  officers 
of  government  to  share  in  them. 


IX 


Mark  xiv.  13. — "  And  he  sendeth  forth  two  of  his  disciples, 

and  saith  unto  them,  Go  ye  into  the  city,  and  there 

shall  meet  you  a   man  bearing  a  pitcher  of  water  : 

follow  him.     And  wheresoever  he  shall  go  in,  say  ye 

to  the   goodman   of   the    house.   The  Master   saith, 

Where  is  the  guest-chamber,  where  I  shall  cat  the 

Passover  with  my  disciples  ?" 

When  Ccstius  wished  to  inform  Nero  of  the  numbers 

which  attended  the  Passover  at  Jerusalem,  he  counted  the 

victims,  and  allowed  ten  ])erso?is  to  each  head,  "  because  a 

company  not  less  than  ten  belong  to  every  sacrifice,  (for  it 

is  not  lawful  for  them  to  feast  singly  by  themselves.)  and 

many  arc  twenty  in  company." — Hell.  Jud.  c.  vi.  9.  §  3. 

Accordingly,  the  Gospel  narrative  is  in  strict  conformity 
with  this  custom.     When  Christ  goes  up  to  Jerusalem  to 


APPEND. 


GOSPELS    AND    ACTS.  345 


attend  the  Passover  for  the  last  time,  he  is  not  described 
as  running  the  chance  of  hospitality  in  the  houses  of  any 
of  his  friends,  because,  on  this  occasion,  the  parties  would 
be  made  up,  and  the  addition  of  thirteen  guests  might  be 
inconvenient,  but  he  sends  forth  beforehand,  from  Bethany, 
most  probably,  two  of  his  disciples  to  the  city,  with  orders 
to  engage  a  room,  (a  precaution  very  necessary  where  so 
many  companies  would  be  seeking  accommodation,)  and 
there  eats  the  Passover  with  his  followers,  a  party  of  thir- 
teen, which  it  appears  was  about  the  usual  number.1 


X. 


Luke  ii.  42. — •"  And  when  he  was  twelve  years  old,  they 
went  up  to  Jerusalem,  after  the  custom  of  the  feast." 

I  am  aware  that  commentators  upon  this  text  quote  the 
Rabbins,  to  show  that  children  of  twelve  years  old  amongst 
the  Jews  were  considered  to  be  entering  the  estate  of  man- 
hood, (see  Wetstein,)  and  that  on  this  account  it  was  that 
Jesus  was  taken  at  that  age  to  the  Passover.  Such  may 
be  the  true  interpretation  of  the  passage.  I  cannot,  how- 
ever, forbear  offering  a  conjecture  which  occurred  to  me 
in  reading  the  history  of  Archelaus. 

The  birth  of  Christ  probably  preceded  the  death  of  Herod 
by  a  year  and  a  half  or  thereabout.  (See  Lardner,  Vol.  i. 
p.  35'2.  Svo.  edit.)  Archelaus  succeeded  Herod,  and  gov- 
erned the  country,  it  should  seem,  about  ten  years.  "  In 
the  tenth  year  of  Archelaus'  reign  the  chief  governors 
among  the  Jews  and  Samaritans,  unable  any  longer  to  en- 
dure his  cruelty  and  tyranny,  accused  him  before  Caesar." 
Caesar  upon  this  sent  for  him  to  Rome,  and  '•  as  soon  as  he 

1  See  Whiston's  Note  upon  Joseph.  B.  J.  vi.  9.  3. 


346  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE 


ArPEND. 


came  to  Rome,  when  the  Emperor  had  heard  his  accusers, 
and  his  defence,  he  banished  him  to  Vienne  in  France,  and 
confiscated  his  goods." — Antiq.  xvii.  c.  15.  The  removal, 
therefore,  of  this  obnoxious  governor,  appears  to  have  been- 
effected  in  our  Lord's  twelfth  year.  Might  not  this  circum- 
stance account  for  the  parents  of  the  child  Jesus  venturing 
to  take  him  to  Jerusalem  at  the  Passover  when  he  was 
twelve  years  old,  and  not  before?  It  was  only  because 
"Archelaus  reigned  in  Judaea  in  the  room  of  his  father 
Herod,"  that  Joseph  was  afraid  to  go  thither  on  his  return 
from  Egypt ;  influenced  not  merely  by  motives  of  personal 
safety,  but  by  the  consideration  that  the  same  jealousy 
which  had  urged  Herod  to  take  away  the  young  child's 
life,  might  also  prevail  with  his  successor  ;  for  we  do  not 
find  that  any  fears  about  himself  or  Mary  withheld  him 
from  subsequently  going  to  the  Passover  even  during  the 
reign  of  Archelaus,  since  it  is  recorded  that  "  they  went  ev- 
ery year."  I  submit  it,  therefore,  to  my  readers'  decision, 
whether  the  same  apprehensions  for  the  life  of  the  infant 
Jesus,  which  prevented  Joseph  from  taking  him  into  Judaea, 
on  hearing  that  Archelaus  was  king,  did  not,  very  proba- 
bly, prevent  him  from  taking  him  up  to  Jerusalem  till  he 
heard  that  Archelaus  was  deposed  ? 


XI 


Luke  vi.  13. — ;:  And  when  it  was  day,  he  called  unto  him 
his  disciples  ;  and  of  them  he  chose  twelve,  whom  also 
he  named  Apostles." 

x.  1. — '■'  After  these  things  the  Lord  appointed  other  seventy 

also,  and  sent  them  two  and  two  before  his  face,"  &c. 

There  is  something  in  the  selection  of  these  numbers 

which  indicates  veracity  in  the  narrative.     They  were,  on 


APPEND.  GOSPKLS    AND    ACTS.  347 

several  accounts,  favorite  numbers  amongst  the  Jews  ;  the 
one  (to  name  no  other  reason)  being  that  of  the  Tribes,  the 
other  (taken  roundly)  that  of  the  Elders.  Accordingly  we 
read  in  Josephus,  that  Yarns,  who  held  a  post  in  the  gov- 
ernment under  Agrippa,  "  called  to  him  twelve  Jews  of 
Caesarea,  of  the  best  character,  and  ordered  them  to  go  to 
Ecbatana,  and  bear  this  message  to  their  countrymen  who 
dwelt  there :  '•  Varus  hath  heard  that  you  intend  to  march 
against  the  king  ;  but  not  believing  the  report  he  hath  sent 
us  to  persuade  you  to  lay  down  your  arms,  counting  such 
compliance  to  be  a  sign  that  he  did  well  not  to  give  credit 
to  those  who  so  spake  concerning  you.'"  "He  also  en- 
joined those  Jews  of  Ecbatana  to  send  seventy  of  then  prin- 
cipal men  to  make  a  defence  for  them  touching  the  accu- 
sation laid  against  them.  So  when  the  twelve  messengers 
came  to  their  countrymen  at  Ecbatana,  and  found  that 
fchey  had  no  designs  of  innovation  at  all.  they  persuaded 
them  to  send  the  seventy  also.  Then  went  these  seventy 
down  to  Caesarea  together  with  the  twelve  ambassadors." 
— (Life  of  Josephus,  §  11). 

This  is  a  very  slight  matter  to  be  sure,,  but  it  is  still 
something  to  find  the  subordinate  parts  of  a  history  in 
strict  keeping  with  the  habits  of  the  people  and  of  the  age- 
to  which  it  professes  to  belong.  The  Evangelist  might 
have  fixed  upon  any  other  indifferent  number  for  the  Apos- 
tles and- first  Disciples  of  Jesus,  without  thereby  incurring 
any  impeachment  of  a  want  of  veracity  :  and  therefore  if 
is  the  more  satisfactory  to  discover  marks  of  truth,  where 
the  absence  of  such  marks  would  not  have  occasioned  the 
least  suspicion  of  falsehood. 


>48  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  APPEND. 


XII. 

Luke  vii.  1. — "Now  when  he  had  ended  all  these  sayings 
in  the  audience  of  the  people,  he  entered  into  Caper- 
naum." 
11. — "  And  it  came  to  pass  the  day  after,  that  he  went  into 
a  city  called  Nain ;  and  many  of  his  disciples  went 
with  him,  and  much  people." 
Jesus  comes  to  Capernaum— he  goes  on  to  Nain — fame 
precedes  him  as  he  approaches  Judaea — he  arrives  in  the 
neighborhood  of  the  Baptist — he  travels  still  further  south 
to  the  vicinity  of  the  Holy  City,  near  which  the  Magdalen 
dwelt — St.  Luke,  therefore,  it  will  be  perceived,  is  here  de- 
scribing a  journey  of  Jesus  from  Galilee  to  Jerusalem. 

Now  let  us  hear  Josephus  (Antiq.  xx.  5.  §  1) :  "  A  quar- 
rel sprung  up  between  the  Samaritans  and  the  Jews,  and 
this  was  the  cause  of  it.  The  Galilseans,  when  they  re- 
sorted to  the  Holy  City  at  the  feasts,  had  to  pass  through 
the  country  of  the  Samaritans.  Now  it  happened  that 
certain  inhabitants  of  a  place  on  thei'oad,  Nam  by  name, 
situated  on  the  borders  of  Samaria  and  the  Great  Plain, 
rose  upon  them  and  slew  many."1 

Jesus,  therefore,  in  (his  his  journey  southwards,  (a  jour- 
ney, be  it  observed,  which  the  Evangelist  docs  not  formally 
lay  down,  but  the  general  direction  of  which  w»  gather 
from  an  incident  or  two  occurring  in  the  course  of  it,  and 
from  the  point  to  which  it  tended.)  Jesus  in  this  his  jour- 
ney is  found  to  come  to  a  city  which,  it  appears,  did  actu- 
ally lie  in  the  way  of  those  who  travelled  from  Galilee  to 

1  Hudson  reads  ru/iiK  Vivalat  Xtyofiivrn,  instead  of  Naif,  the  common  read- 
i i i <r ;  but  see  Hug's  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament,  Vol. I.  p.  23,  (trans- 
lation), where  the  coincidence  is  suggested,  and  the  reasons  given  for  abid- 
ing by  the  ordinary  text. 


APPEND.  GOSPELS    AND   ACTS.    .  34:> 

Jerusalem.  This  is  as  it  should  be.  A  part  of  the  story  is 
certainly  matter  of  fact.  There  is  every  reason  to  believe 
the  Evangelist  when  he  says  that  Jesus  "  went  into  a  city 
called  Nain."  What  reason  is  there  to  disbelieve  him  when- 
he  goes  on  to  say,  that  he  met  a  dead  man  at  the  gate; 
that  he  touched  the  bier ;  bade  the  young  man  arise  ;  and 
thai  the  dead  sat  up  and  spake  ? 


XIII. 

Luke  xxiii.  G. — "  When  Pilate  heard  of  Galilee,  he  asked' 
whether  the  man  were  a  Galikean.     And  as  soon  as 
he  knew  that  he  belonged  unto  Herod's  jurisdiction 
he  sent  him  to  Herod,  who  himself  also  id  as  at  Jeru- 
salem at  that  timeP 
The  fair  inference  from  this  last  clause  is,  that  Jerusa- 
lem wras  not  the  common  place  of  abode  either  of  Herod 
or  Pilate.     Such  is  certainly  the  force  of  the  emphatic  ex- 
pression, "who  himself  also  was  at   Jerusalem  at    thai. 
time,"  applied,  as  it  is,  directly  to  Herod,  but  with  a  refer- 
ence to  the  person  of  whom  mention  had  been  made  in 
the  former  part  of  the  sentence.     The  more  circuitous  this 
insinuation  is,  the  stronger  does  it  make  for  the  argument 
Now  that  Herod  did  not  reside  at  Jerusalem,  may  be  in- 
ferred from  the  following  passage  in  Joseph  us. 

"  This  king'"  (says  he,  meaning  the  Herod  who  killed 
James,  the  brother  of  John,  Acts  xii.)  "  was  not  at  all  like 
that  Herod  who  reigned  be/ore  him,  (meaning  the  Herod 
to  whom  Christ  was  sent  by  Pilate,)  for  the  latter  waa 
stern  and  severe  in  his  punishments,  and  had  no  mercy  on 
those  he  hated  :  confessedly  better  disposed  towards  the 
Greeks  than  the  Jews  :  accordingly,  of  the  cities  of  the 
strangers,  some  he  beautified   at  his  own   expense  with 

30 


350  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE 


APPEND. 


baths  and  theatres,  and  others  with  temples  and  corridors  ; 
but  upon  no  Jewish  city  did  he  bestow  the  smallest  decora- 
tion or  the  most  trifling  present.  Whereas  the  latter  Herod 
(Agrippa)  was  of  a  mild  and  gentle  disposition,  and  good 
to  all  men.  To  strangers  he  was  beneficent,  but  yet  more 
kind  to  the  Jews,  his  countrymen,  with  whom  he  sympa- 
thized in  all  their  troubles.  He  took  pleasure  therefore  in 
constantly  living  at  Jerusalem,  and  strictly  observed  all 
the  customs  of  his  nation." — Antiq.  xix.  7.  §  3.  Thus 
does  it  appear  from  the  Jewish  historian,  that  the  Herod 
of  the  Acts  was  a  contrast  to  the  Herod  in  question,  inas- 
much as  he  loved  the  Jews  that  dwelt  at  Jerusalem,  Nor 
is  St.  Luke  less  accurate  in  representing  Pilate  to  have 
been  not  resident  at  Jerusalem.  Ceesarea  seems  to  have 
been  the  place  of  abode  of  the  Roman  governors  of  Judaea 
in  general.  (See  Antiq.  xviii.  4.  §  1. — xx.  4.  §  4.)  pf 
Pilate  it  certainly  was ;  for  when  the  Jews  had  to  com- 
plain to  him  of  (he  profanation  which  had  been  offered  to 
their  Temple  by  the  introduction  of  Caesar's  image  into  it, 
it  was  to  Caesarea  that  they  carried  their  remonstrance. 
(Bell.  Jud.  ii.  c.  9,  §2.) 

It  was  probably  the  business  of  the  Passover  which 
had  brought  Pilate  to  Jerusalem  for  a  few  days,  the  pres- 
ence of  the  Governor  being  never  more  needful  in  the 
capital  than  on  such  an  occasion. 


XIV. 

John  iv.  15. — "The  woman  saith  unto  him,  Sir,  give  me 
this  water,  that  I  thirst  not,   neither  come  hither  to 
draw/' 
It  seems,  therefore,  that  there  was  no  water  in  Sychar, 

and  that  the  inhabitants  had  to  come  to  this  well  to  draw. 


APPEND. 


GOSPELS    AND    ACTS.  351 


Most  likely  it  was  at  some  little  distance  from  the  town, 
for  the  woman  speaks  of  the  labor  of  fetching  the  water 
as  considerable ;  and  Jesus  stopped  short  of  the  town  at 
the  well,  because  he  "  was  wearied  with  his  journey," 
whilst  his  disciples  went  on  to  buy  bread. 

Now,  on  the  breaking  out  of  the  war  with  the  Romans, 
some  of  the  Samaritans  assembled  on  Mount  Gerizim, 
close  to  the  feet  of  which  (be  it  observed)  was  the  city 
of  Si/char  placed.1  Upon  this,  Ve?pasian  determined  to 
put  some  troops  in  motion  against  them.  (;  For  although 
all  Samaria  was  provided  with  garrisons,  yet  did  the  num- 
ber and  evil  spirit  of  those  who  had  come  together  at 
Mount  Gerizim  give  ground  for  apprehension  ;  therefore 
he  sent  Cerealis,  the  commander  of  the  fifth  Legion,  with 
six  hundred  horse,  and  three  thousand  foot.  Not  thinking 
it  safe,  however,  to  go  up  the  mountain  and  give  them 
battle,  because  many  of  the  enemy  were  on  the  higher 
ground,  he  encompassed  all  the  circuit  (vnugtiav)  of  the 
mountain  with  his  army,  and  watched  them  all  that  day. 
But  it  came  to  pas--,  that  whilst  the  /Samaritans  were 
now  wUJiout  water,  a  terrible  heat  came  on,  for  it  was 
summer,  and  the  people  were  unprovided  with  necessaries, 
so  that  some  of  them  died  of  thirst  that  same  day, 
and  many  others,  preferring  slavery  to  such  a  death,  fled, 
to  (he  Romans.1' — Cell.  Jud.  in.  7.  §32. 

The  troops  of  Cerealis,  no  doubt,  cut  them  off  from  the 
well  of  Sychar,  which  we  perceive,  from  St.  John,  was  the 
place  to  which  the  neighborhood  were  compelled  to  resort. 
This  is  the  more  likely,  inasmuch  as  the  soldiers  of  the 
Roman  general  do  not  appear  to  have  suffered  from  thirst 
at  all  on  this  occasion. 

1   Hixtfta  Ktijiivriv  rrpdf  r:<>  Vapi^clv  Spu. — JoSf.ph.  Antiq.  II.  8.  6. 


352  THE    VERACITY    OF    THE  APPEND. 


XV. 

John  xix.  13. — "  When  Pilate  therefore  heard  that  saying, 
he  brought  Jesus  forth,  and  sat  down  in  the  judg- 
ment-seat in  a  place  that  is  called  the  PavcmentP 
(Ai66ot()U)tov.) 

According  to  St.  John,  therefore,  (he  being  the  only 
one  of  the  Evangelists  who  mentions  this  incident,)  Pilate 
comes  out  of  his  own  hall  to  his  judgment-seat  on  the 
Pavement.  The  hall  and  the  Pavement  then  were  near 
or  contiguous. 

Now  let  us  turn  to  Josephus.  "  The  City  was  strength- 
ened by  the  palace  in  which  he  (Herod)  dwelt,  and  the 
Temple  by  the  fortifications  attached  to  the  bastion  called 
Antonia." — (Antiq.  xv.  8.  §  5.)  Hence  we  conclude  that 
the  Temple  was  near  the  Castle  of  Antonia. 

"  On  the  western  side  of  the  court  (of  the  Temple)  were 
four  gates,  one  looking  to  the  palace."  (Antiq.  xv.  11. 
§  5.)  Hence  we  conclude  that  the  Temple  was  near  the 
palace  of  Herod.  Therefore  the  palace  was  near  the 
Castle  of  Antonia. 

But  if  Pilate's  hall  was  a  part  of  the  palace,  as  it  was. 
(that  being  the  residence  of  the  Roman  governor  when  he 
was  at  Jerusalem.)  then  Pilate's  hall  was  near  the  Castle 
of  Antonia. 

Here  let  us  pause  a  moment,  and  direct  our  attention  to 
a  passage  in  the  Jewish  War,  (vi.  1.  h  8.)  where  Josephus 
records  the  prowess  of  a  centurion  in  the  Roman  army, 
Julianus  by  name,  in  an  assault  upon  Jerusalem. 

"  This  man  had  posted  himself  near  Titus,  at  the  Castle 
of  Antonia,  when  observing  that  the  Romans  were  giving 
way.  and  defending  themselves  but  indifferently,  he  rushed 
forward  and  drove  back  the  victorious  Jews  to  the  corner 


APPEND.  GOSPELS    AND    ACTS.  353 

of  the  inner  Temple,  single-handed,  for  the  whole  multi- 
tude fled  before  him,  scarcely  believing  such  strength  and 
spirit  to  belong  to  a  mere  mortal.  But  he,  dashing  through 
the  crowd,  smote  them  on  every  side,  as  many  as  he  could 
lay  bands  upon.  It  was  a  sight  which  struck  Cesar  with 
astonishment,  and  seemed  terrific  to  alL  Nevertheless  his 
fate  overtook  him,  as  how  could  it  be  otherwise,  unless  he 
had  been  more  than  man  ;  for  having  many  sharp  nails  in 
his  shoes,  after  the  soldier's  fashion,  he  slipped  as  he  was 
running  upon  the  Pavement,  (x«ni  AidooTgtixov,)  and  fell 
upon  his  back.  The  clatter  of  his  arms  caused  the  fugi- 
tives to  turn  about :  and  now  a  cry  was  set  up  by  the 
Romans  in  the  Castle  of  Antonia,  who  were  in  alarm  for 
the  man." 

From  this  passage  it  appears  that  a  pavemetit  was  near 
the  Castle  of  Antonia ;  but  we  have  already  seen  that  the 
Castle  of  Antonia  was  near  the  palace,  (or  Pilate's  hall :) 
therefore  this  pavement  was  near  Pilate's  hall.  This  then 
is  proved  from  Josephus,  though  very  circuitously,  which 
is  not  the  worse,  that  very  near  Pilate's  residence  a  pave- 
ment (Aidocnqmoc^)  there  was ;  that  it  gave  its  name  to 
that  spot  is  not  proved,  yet  nothing  can  be  more  probable 
than  that  it  did  ;  and  consequently  nothing  more  probable 
than  that  St.  John  is  speaking  with  truth  and  accuracy 
when  be  makes  Pilate  bring  Jesus  forth  and  sit  down  in 
his  judgment-seat  in  a  place  called  the  Pavements 

XVI. 

John  xix.  15. — "  The  chief  priests  answered,  We  have  no 
king  but  Ccesar." 
Although  the  Roman  emperors  never  took  the  title  of 

i  See  Hug's  Introtl.  to  the  New  Testament,  Vol.  i.  p.  18. 

30* 


354  THE    VERACITY    OP    THE  APPEND. 

kings,1  yet  it  appears  from  Josephus  that  they  were  so 
called  by  the  Jews  ;  and  in  further  accordance  with  the 
writers  of  the  New  Testament,  that  historian  commonly 
emplo}^  the  term  Ccesar,  as  sufficient  to  designate  the 
reigning  prince.  Thus,  when  speaking  of  Titus,  he  says, 
"  many  did  not  so  much  as  know  that  the  king  was  in 
any  danger/'  And  again,  shortly  after,  "  the  enemy  in- 
deed made  a  great  shout  at  the  boldness  of  Casar,  and 
exhorted  one  another  to  rush  upon  him." — (Bell.  Jud.  v. 
2.  §  2.) 

This  is  a  curious  coincidence  in  popular  phraseology, 
and  such  as  bespeaks  the  writers  of  the  New  Testament 
to  have  been  familiar  with  the  scenes  they  describe,  and 
the  parties  they  introduce. 


XVII. 

Acts  iii.  1,  2. — "  Now  Peter  and  John  went  up  together 
into  the  Temple  at  the  hour  of  prayer,  being  the  ninth 
hour.  And  a  certain  man  lame  from  his  mother's 
womb  was  carried,  whom  they  laid  daily  at  the  gate 
of  the  Temple  which  is  called  Beautiful,  to  ask  alms 
of  them  that  entered  into  the  Temple." 
Peter  recovers  the  cripple.  The  fame  of  his  miracu- 
lous cure  is  instantly  spread  abroad. 

"  And  as  the  lame  man  which  was  healed  held  Peter 
and  John,  all  the  people  ran  together  unto  them  in  the 
■porch  that  is  called  Solomon's,  greatly  wondering." — 
(vcr.  11.) 

There  is  a  propriety  in  the  localities  of  this  miracle 
which  is  favorable  to  a  belief  in  it*  truth. 

Josephus   speaks  of    a   great   outer    gate,  (that  of  the 

1  For  this  remark  I  am  indebted  to  Whiston. 


APPEND,  GOSPELS    AND   ACTS.  355 

Porch,)  ■«  opening  into  the  Court  of  the  women  on  the 
East,  and  opposite  to  the  gate  of  the  Temple,  in  size  sur- 
passing the  others,  being  fifty  cubits  high  and  forty  wide; 
and  more  finished  in  its  decorations,  by  reason  of  the  thick 
plates  of  silver  and  gold  which  were  upon  it."— (Bell  Jud 
v.  §  3.) 

But  in  another  passage  of  the  same  author  we  read  as 
follows  :— '•  They  persuaded  the  king  (Agrippa)  to  restore 
the  Eastern  Porch.     This  was   a    porch  of  the   outer 
Temple,  situated  upon  the  edge  of  a  deep  abyss,  resting 
upon  a  wall  four  hundred  cubits  high,  constructed  of  quad- 
rangular stones,  quite  white,  each  stone  twenty  cubits  by 
six,  the  work  of  King  Solomon,  the  original  builder  of  the 
Temple."     (Antiq.  xx.  8.  §  7.)     Thus  it  appears  that  a 
gate,  more  highly  ornamented  than  the  rest,  looked  to  the 
East;  that  a -porch,  of  which  Solomon  was  the  founder, 
looked  also  to  the  East ;  that  both,  therefore,  were  on  the 
same  side  of  the  Temple,  and  accordingly  that,  it  was  very 
natural  for  the  people,  hearing  that  a  cripple  who  usually 
lay  at  the  Beautiful  Gate,  and  who  had  been  cured  as  he 
lay  there,  it  was  very  natural  for  them  to  run  to  Solomon's 
Porch,  to  satisfy  themselves  of  the  truth  of  the  report.1 


XVIII. 

Acts  ix.  36.—"  Now  there  was  at  Joppa  a  certain  disciple, 

named  Tabitha,  which  by  interpretation  is  called 

DorcasP 

It  may  be  remarked,  that  Joscphus  who  (like  St.  Luke) 

wrote  in  Greek  of  things  which  happened  in  a  country 

where  Syriac  was  the  common  language,  thinks  fit  to  add 

1  See  Hug,  Vol.  i.  p.  19. 


THE    VERACITY    OP    THE  APPEND. 

a  similar  explanation  when  he  alludes  to  this  same  proper 
name. 

"  They  sent  one  John,  who  was  the  most  bloody-minded 
of  them  all,  to  do  that  execution.  This  man  was  also 
called  the  son  of  Dorcas  in  the  language  of  our  coun- 
try:'— (Bell.  Jud.  iv.  3.  §  5.) 


XIX. 

Acts  vi.  1. — "  And  in  those  days,  when  the  number  of  the 
disciples  was  multiplied,  there  arose  a  murmuring 
of  the  Grecians  against  the  Hebreivs,  because  their 
widows  were  neglected  in  the  daily  ministration." 

In  the  first  section  I  found  an  instance  of  consistency 
without  design  in  this  passage,  on  comparing  it  with  the 
context ;  I  now  find  a  second  like  instance,  on  comparing 
it  with  Josephus.  It  seems  that  when  the  disciples  became 
more  numerous,  a  jealousy  began  to  discover  itself  between 
the  Grecians  and  the  Hebrews.  The  circumstance  is 
casually  mentioned  by  St.  Luke,  as  the  accident  which 
gave  occasion  to  the  appointment  of  deacons  ;  yet  how 
strictly  characteristic  is  it  of  the  country  and  times  in 
which  it  is  said  to  have  happened. 

"  There  was  a  disturbance  at  Ceesarea,"  writes  Josephus, 
"  between  the  Jews  and  Syrians  respecting  the  equal  en- 
joyment of  civil  rights ;  the  Jews  laying  claim  to  prece- 
dence because  Herod,  who  was  a  Jew,  had  founded  the 
city:  the  Syrians,  on  the  other  hand,  admitting  this,  but 
maintaining  that  Ctesarea  was  originally  called  the  Tower 
of  Straton,  and  did  not  then  contain  a  single  Jew." — 
(Antiq.  xx.  7.  §  7.)  In  the  end  the  two  parties  broke  out 
into  open  war.  This  was  when  Felix  was  governor. 
On  one  occasion,  under  Florus,  we  read  of  20,000  Jews 


APPEND.  GOSPELS    AND    ACTS.  357 

perishing  at  Caesarea  by  the  hands  of  the  Greek  or  Syrian 
part  of  the  population. — (Bel.  Jud.  n.  18.  1.) — And  again, 
we  are  told  that l:  fearful  troubles  prevailed  throughout  all 
Syria,  each  city  dividing  itself  into  two  armies,  and  the 
safety  of  the  one  consisted  in  forestalling  the  violence  of 
the  other.  Thus  the  people  passed  their  days  in  blood  and 
their  nights  in  terror." — (Bel.  Jud.  n.  15.  2.) 

It  is  most  improbable  that  the  writer  of  the  Acts,  if  he 
were  making  up  a  story,  should  have  bethought  himself 
of  a  circumstance  at  once  so  unimportant  as  this  murmur- 
ing of  the  Grecians  against  the  Hebrews,  and  yet  so  truly 
descriptive  of  the  people  where  his  scene  was  laid  ?  This 
little  incident  (the  more  trifling  the  better  for  our  purpose) 
carries  with  it  the  strongest  marks  of  truth  ;  and,  like  the 
single  watch-word,  is  a  voucher  for  the  general  honesty  of 
the  party  that  utters  it.  Indeed,  the  establishment  of  one 
fact  may  be  thought  in  itself  to  entail  the  credibility  of 
many  more.  If  it  be  certain  that  there  was  a  murmuring 
of  the  Grecians  against  the  Hebrews  because  their  widows 
were  neglected  in  the  daily  ministration,  then  it  is  probable 
that  there  was  a  common  fund  out  of  which  widows  were 
maintained  ;  that  many  sold  their  possessions  to  contribute 
to  this  fund  ;  that  it  must  have  been  a  strong  motive 
which  could  urge  to  such  a  disposal  of  their  property  :  that 
no  motive  could  be  so  likely  as  their  conviction  of  the  truth 
of  Christianity  ;  and  that  such  a  conviction  could  spring 
out  of  nothing  so  surely  as  the  evidence  of  miracles.  I  do 
not  say  that  all  these  matters  necessarily  follow  from  the 
certainty  of  the  first  simple  fact,  but  I  say  that  admitting 
it,  they  all  follow  in  a  train  of  very  natural  consequence. 


358  THE    VERACITY    OF   THE  APPEND. 


XX. 

Acts  xxv.  13. — "  And  after  certain  days  King,  Agrippa 
and  Bernice  came  unto  Caisarea  to  salute  Festus" 

This  Agrippa  (Agrippa  Minor)  had  succeeded,  by  per- 
mission of  Claudius,  to  the  territories  of  his  uncle  Herod ; 
at  least,  Trachonitas,  Bataneea,  and  Abilene,  were  con- 
firmed to  him.  From  this  passage  in  the  Acts  it  appears, 
as  might  be  expected,  that  he  was  anxious  to  be  well  with 
the  Roman  Government,  and  accordingly  that  he  lost  no 
time  in  paying  his  respects  to  Festus,  the  new  representa- 
tive of  that  Government  in  Judaea.  It  is  a  singular  and 
minute  coincidence  well  worth  our  notice,  that  Josephus 
records  instances  of  this  same  Agrippa's  obsequiousness  to 
Roman  authorities,  of  precisely  the  same  kind.  "  About 
this  time,"  says  he,"  King  Agrippa  went  to  Alexandria, 
to  salute  Alexander,  who  had  been  sent  by  Nero  to  gov- 
ern Egypt.''' — (Bel.  Jiul.  n.  15.  §  1.) 

And  again,  (what  is  yet  more  to  our  purpose,)  we  read, 
on  another  occasion,  that  Bernice  accompanied  Agrippa 
in  one  of  these  visits  of  ceremony  ;  for  having  appointed 
Varus  to  take  care  of  their  kingdom  in  their  absence,  "  they 
went  to  Berytus  with  the  intention  of  meeting  Gessius 
(Florus,)  the  Roman  governor  of  Judaa." — (Jos.  Life. 
§  11.) 

This  is  a  case  singularly  parallel,  to  that  in  the  Acts : 
for  Gessius  Florus  held  the  very  same  office,  in  the  same 
country,  as  Felix. 

XXI 

Acts  xxv.  23. — "And  on  the  morrow,  when  Agrippa  was 
come,  and  Bernice]  with  great  pomp,  and  was  entered 


APPEND.  GOSPELS  AND-  ACTS.  359 

into  the  place  of  hearing,  with  the  chief  captains  and 
principal  men  of  the  city,  at  Festus'  commandment 
Paul  was  brought  forth." 

It  might  seem  extraordinary  that  Bernice  should  be 
present  on  such  an  occasion — that  a  woman  should  take 
any  share  in  an  affair,  one  would  have  supposed,  foreign 
to  her,  and  exclusively  belonging  to  the  other  sex.  But 
here  again  we  have  another  proof  of  the  veracity  and  ac- 
curacy of  the  sacred  writings.  For  when  Agrippa  (the 
same  Agrippa)  endeavored  to*  combat  the  spirit  of  rebel- 
lion which  was  beginning  to  show  itself  amongst  the  Jews, 
and  addressed  them  in  (hat  famous  speech  given  in  Jose- 
phus,  which -throws  so  much  light  on  the  power  and  pro- 
vincial polity  of  the  Romans,  he  first  of  all  '■'•placed  his 
sister  Bernice  (the  same  Bernice)  in  a  conspicuous  situa- 
tion, upon  the  house  of  the  Asainona?ans,  which  was  above 
the  gallery,  at  the  passage  to  the  upper  city,  where  the 
bridge  joined  the  Temple  to  the  gallery  ;;'  and  then  he 
spoke  to  the  people.  And  when  his  oration  was  ended,  we 
read  that  "  both  he  and  his  sister  shed  tears,  and  so  re- 
pressed much  violence  in  the  multitude." — (Bel.  Jud.  u. 
16.  §  3.) 

There  is  another  passage,  occurring  in  the  life  of  Jose- 
phus,  which  is  no  less  valuable  ;  for  it  serves  to  show  yet 
further  the  political  importance  of  Bernice,  and  how  much 
she  was  in  the  habit  of  acting  with  Agrippa  on  all  public 
occasions.  One  Philip,  who  was  governor  of  Gamala  and 
the  country  about  it,  under  Agrippa,  had  occasion  to  com- 
municate with  the  latter,  probably  on  the  subject  of  his 
escape  from  Jerusalem,  where  he  had  been  recently  in  dan- 
ger, and  of  his  return  to  his  own  station.  The  transaction 
is  thus  described  : — 

u  He  wrote  to  Agrippa  and  Bernice,  and  gave  the  let- 
ters to  one  of  his  freedmen  to  carry  to  Varus,  who  at  that 


360  THE    VERACITY   OF   THE  APPEND. 

time  was  procurator  of  the  kingdom,  which  the  sovereigns 
(i.  e.  the  king  and  his  sister-wife)  had  intrusted  him  withal, 
while  they  were  gone  to  Berytus  to  meet  Gessius.  When 
Varus  had  received  these  letters  of  Philip,  and  had  learned 
that  he  was  in  safety,  he  was  very  uneasy  at  it,  supposing 
that  he  should  appear  useless  to  the  sovereigns  {SaatUvaiv) 
now  Philip  was  come."     (Josephus's  Life,  §  11.) 


XXII. 

Acts  xxviii.  11,  12,  13. — "  And  after  three  months  we  de- 
parted in  a  ship  of  Alexandria,  which  had  wintered 
in  the  isle,  whose  sign  was  Castor  and  Pollux.     And 
landing  at  Syracuse,    we   tarried   there   three   days. 
And  from  thence  we  fetched  a  compass,  and  came  to 
Rhegium  :    and  after  one   day  the  south  wind  blew, 
and  ice  came  lite  next  day  to  Puteoli" 
Puteoli  then,  it  should  seem,  was  the  destination  of 
this  vessel  from  Alexandria.     Now,  we  may  collect,  from 
the  independent  testimony  ol   the  Jewish   historian,  that 
this  was  the  port  of  Italy  to  u-hich  ships  from  Egypt 
and  the  Levante  in  those  times  commonly  sailed.    Thus 
when  Herod  Agrippa  went  from  Judaea  to  Rome,  for  the 
purpose  of  paying  his  court  to  Tiberias,  and  bettering  his 
fortune,  he  directed  his  course  first  to  Alexandria,  for  the 
sake  of  visiting  a  friend,    and  then   crossing  the  Medi- 
terranean, he  landed  at  Puteoli.      (Antiq.  xviii.  7.   §  4.) 
Again,  when  Herod    the  Tetrarch,   at  the  instigation  of 
Herodias,   undertook  a  voyage    to  Rome,   to  solicit  from 
Caligula  a  higher  title,  which  might  put  him  upon  a  level 
with  his  brother-in-law,  Herod  Agrippa,  the  latter  pursued 
him  to  Italy,  and  both  of  them  (says  Joseph  us,)  landed. 


APPEND.  GOSPELS   AND    ACTS.  361 

at  Dichaarchia  (Puteoli,)  and  found  Caius  at  Baiae. 
(Antiq.  xviii.  8.  §  2.) 

Take  a  third  instance.  Josephus  had  himself  occasion, 
when  a  young  man,  to  go  to  Rome.  On  his  passage  the 
vessel  in  which  he  sailed  foundered,  but  a  ship  from  Cyreue 
picked  him  up,  together  with  eighty  of  his  companions ; 
'■'•and.  having  safely  arrived  (says  he)  at  Dichcearchia. 
which  the  Italians  call  Puteoli,  I  became  acquainted  with 
Aliturus,"  &c.     (Josephus's  Life,  §  3.) 

In  this  last  passage  there  is  a  singular  resemblance  to 
the  circumstances  of  St.  Paul's  voyage.  Josephus,  though 
not  going  to  Rome  as  a  prisoner  who  had  himself  appealed 
from  Felix  to  Caesar,  was  going  to  Rome  on  account  of  two 
friends,  whom  Felix  thought  proper  to  send  to  Caesar's 
judgment-seat — he  suffered  shipwreck — he  was  forwarded 
by  another  vessel  coming  from  Africa — and  finally  he 
landed  at  Puteoli. 


TELE    END. 


B.O'RM  PAULIM; 


OR, 


THE    TRUTH 


THE  SCRIPTURE  HISTORY  OF  ST.  PAUL  EVINCED. 


BT 

WILLIAM    PALEY,    D.D. 

ARCHDEACON    CP    CARLISLE. 


NEW   YORK: 

ROBERT    CARTER    &    BROTHERS, 
No.    285    BROADWAY. 

1851. 


CONTENTS 


CHAPTER  I. 

FJlOC 

Exposition  of  the  Argument        ......        5 

CHAPTER  n. 
The  Epistle  to  the  Romans' 16 

CHAPTER  III. 

The  First  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians  4$ 

CHAPTER  IV. 

The  Second  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians    ....      63 

CHAPTER  V, 

The  Epistle  to  the  Galatians   ......      9& 

CHAPTER  VI. 

The  Second  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians        •        ,        .        .128 

CHAPTER  VII. 

The  Epistle  to  the  Philippians, 156 

CHAPTER  VIII. 

The  Epistle  to  the  Colossians  .        .    •    .        .        .  170 

CHAPTER  IX. 

The  First  Epistle  to  the  Thessalonians  .        .        .        .179- 

CHAPTER  X. 
The  Second  Epistle  to  the  Thessalonians        .        .        .     190* 


IV  CONTENTS. 

CHAPTER  XI. 

Mi 

The  First  Epistle  to  Timothy 197 

CHAPTER  XII. 

The  Second  Epistle  to  Timothy 207 

CHAPTER  XIII. 

The  Epistle  to  Titus 218 

CHAPTER  XIV. 
The  Epistle  to  Philemon 225 

CHAPTER  XV. 

The  Subscriptions  of  the  Epistles 232 

CHAPTER  XVI. 
The  Conclusion 237 


THE    TRUTH 


SCRIPTURE  HISTORY  OF  SAINT  PAUL  EVINCED. 


CHAPTER  I. 

EXPOSITION    OF    THE    ARGUMENT. 

The  volume  of  Christian  Scriptures  contains  thirteen  let- 
ters purporting  to  be  written  by  St.  Paul ;  it  contains  also 
a  book  which,  amongst  other  things,  professes  to  deliver 
the  history,  or  rather  memoirs  of  the  history,  of  this  same 
person.  By  assuming  the  genuineness  of  the  letters,  we 
may  prove  the  substantial  truth  of  the  history ;  or,  by  as- 
suming the  truth  of  the  history,  we  may  argue  strongly 
in  support  of  the  genuineness  of  the  letters.  But  I  assume 
neither  the  one  nor  the  oi'her.  The  reader  is  at  liberty 
to  suppose  these  writings  to  have  lately  been  discovered 
in  the  library  of  the  Escurial,  and  to  come  to  our  hands 
destitute  of  any  extrinsic  or  collateral  evidence  whatever ; 
and  the  argument  I  am  about  to  offer  is  calculated  to 
show  that  a  comparison  of  the  different  writings  would, 
even  under  these  circumstances,  afford  good  reason  to 
believe  the  persons  and  transactions  to  have  been  real, 
the  letters  authentic,  and  the  narration,  in  the  main,  to  be 
true. 

Agreement  or  conformity  between  letters  bearing  the 


6  EXPOSITION    OF    THE    ARGUMENT. 

name  of  an  ancient  author,  and  a  received  history  of  that 
author's  life,  does  not  necessarily  establish  the  credit  of 
either :  because, 

1.  The  history  may,  like  Middleton's  Life  of  Cicero,  or 
Jortin's  Life  of  Erasmus,  have  been  wholly,  or  in  part, 
compiled  from  the  letters ;  in  which  case  it  is  manifest 
that  the  history  adds  nothing  to  the  evidence  already  af- 
forded by  the  letters  :  or, 

2.  The  letters  may  have  been  fabricated  out  of  the 
history ;  a  species  of  imposture  which  is  certainly  prac- 
ticable ;  and  which,  without  any  accession  of  proof  or 
authority,  would  necessarily  produce  the  appearance  of 
consistency  and  agreement :  or, 

3.  The  history  and  letters  may  have  been  founded  upon 
some  authority  common  to  both  ;  as  upon  reports  and  tra- 
ditions which  prevailed  in  the  age  in  which  they  were  com- 
posed, or  upon  some  ancient  record  now  lost,  which  both 
writers  consulted  ;  in  which  case,  also,  the  letters,  without 
being  genuine,  may  exhibit  marks  of  conformity  with  the 
history ;  and  the  history,  without  being  true,  may  agree 
with  the  letters. 

Agreement  therefore,  or  conformity,  is  only  to  be  relied 
upon  so  far  as  we  can  exclude  these  several  suppositions. 
Now  the  point  to  be  noticed  is,  that,  in  the  three  cases 
above  enumerated,  conformity  must  be  the  effect  of  de- 
sign. Where  the  history  is  compiled  from  the  letters, 
which  is  the  first  case,  the  design  and  composition  of  the 
work  are  in  general  so  confessed,  or  made  so  evident  by 
comparison,  as  to  leave  us  in  no  danger  of  confounding 
the  production  of  the  original*  history,  or  of  mistaking  it 
for  an  independent  authority.  The  agreement,  it  is  prob- 
able, will  be  close  and  uniform,  and  will  easily  be  per- 
ceived to  result  from  the  intention  of  the  author,  and  from 
the  plan  and  conduct  of  his  work. — Where  the  letters  are 


EXPOSITION    OF    THE    ARGUMENT.  7 

fabricated  from  the  history,  which  is  the  second  case,  it 
is  always  for  the  purpose  of  imposing  a  forgery  upon  the 
public ;  and,  in  order  to  give  color  and  probability  to  the 
fraud,  names,  places,  and  circumstances,  found  in  the  his- 
tory, may  be  studiously  introduced  into  the  letters,  as 
well  as  a  general  consistency  be  endeavored  to  be  main- 
tained.    But  here  it  is  manifest  that  whatever  congruity 
appears  is  the  consequence  of  meditation,  artifice,  and  de- 
sign.— The  third  case  is  that  wherein  the  history  and  the 
letters,  without  any  direct  privity  or  communication  with 
each  other,  derive  their  materials  from  the  same  source  ; 
and,  by  reason  of  their  common  original,  furnish  instances 
of  accordance  and  correspondency.     This  is  a  situation 
in  which  we  must  allow  it  to  be  possible  for  ancient  writ- 
ings to  be  placed ;  and  it  is  a  situation  in  which  it  is  more 
difficult  to  distinguish  spurious  from  genuine  writings  than 
in  either  of  the  cases  described  in  the  preceding  supposi- 
tions ;  inasmuch  as  the  congruities  observable  are  so  far 
accidental,  as  that  they  are  not  produced    by  the  im- 
mediate transplanting  of  names  and  circumstances  out  of 
one  writing  into  the  other.     But  although,  with  respect 
to  each  other,  the  agreement  in  these  writings  be  medi- 
ate and  secondary,  yet  is  it  not  properly  or  absolutely  un- 
designed ;  because,  with  respect  to  the  common  original 
from  which  the  information  of  the  writers  proceeds,  it  is 
studied  and  factitious.     The  case  of  which  we  treat  must, 
as  to  the  letters,  be  a  case  of  forgery ;  and  when   the 
writer  who  is  personating  another  sits  down  to  his  com- 
position— whether  he   have   the  history  with  which  we 
now  compare  the  letters,  or  some  other  record,  before 
him  ;  or  whether  he  have  only  loose  tradition  and  reports 
to  go  by — he  must  adapt  his  imposture,  as  well  as  he  can, 
to  what  he  finds  in  these  accounts;  and  his  adaptations 
will  be  the  result  of  counsel,  scheme,  and  industry ;  art 


6  EXPOSITION    OF    THE    ARGUMENT. 

must  be  employed  ;  and  vestiges  will  appear  of  manage- 
ment and  design.  Add  to  this,  that,  in  most  of  the  follow- 
ing examples,  the  circumstances  in  which  the  coincidence 
is  remarked  are  of  too  particular  and  domestic  a  nature 
to  have  floated  down  upon  the  stream  of  general  tradition. 

Of  the  three  cases  which  we  have  stated,  the  difference 
between  the  first  and  the  two  others  is,  that  in  the  first 
the  design  may  be  fair  and  honest,  in  the  others  it  must 
be  accompanied  with  the  consciousness  of  fraud;  but  in 
all  there  is  design.  In  examining,  therefore,  the  agree- 
ment between  ancient  writings,  the  character  of  truth  and 
originality  is  undesignedness  :  and  this  test  applies  to 
every  supposition  ;  for,  whether  we  suppose  the  history  to 
be  true,  but  the  letters  spurious ;  or,  the  letters  to  be  gen- 
uine, but  the  history  false;  or,  lastly,  falsehood  to  belong 
to  both — the  history  to  be  a  fable,  and  the  letters  fictitious  ; 
the  same  inference  will  result — that  either  there  will  be 
no  agreement  between  them,  or  the  agreement  will  be 
the  effect  of  design.  Nor  will  it  elude  the  principle  of 
this  rule,  to  suppose  the  same  person  to  have  been  the  au- 
thor of  all  the  letters,  or  even  the  author  both  of  the  let- 
ters and  the  history  ;  for  no  less  design  is  necessary  to 
produce  coincidence  between  different  parts  of  a  man's 
own  writings,  especially  when  they  are  made  to  take  the 
different  forms  of  a  history  and  of  original  letters,  than  to 
adjust  them  to  the  circumstances  found  in  any  other  writ- 
ing. 

With  respect,  to  those  writings  of  the  New  Testament 
which  are  to  be  the  subject  of  our  present  consideration, 
I  think  that,  as  to  the  authenticity  of  the  epistles,  this  ar- 
gument, where  it  is  sufficiently  sustained  by  instances,  is 
nearly  conclusive ;  for  I  cannot  assign  a  supposition  of 
forgery,  in  which  coincidences  of  the  kind  we  inquire 
after  are  likely  to  appear.     As  to  the  history,  it  extends 


EXPOSITION-    OF    THE    ARGUMENT.  9 

to  these  points  : — It  approves  the  general  reality  of  the 
circumstances  :  it  proves  the  historian's  knowledge  of 
these  circumstances.  In  the  present  instance  it  confirms 
his  pretensions  of  having  been  a  contemporary,  and  in  the 
latter  part  of  his  history  a  companion,  of  St.  Paul.  In  a 
word,  it  establishes  the  substantial  truth  of  the  narration : 
and  substantial  truth  is  that  which,  in  every  historical  in- 
quiry, ought  to  be  the  first  thing  sought  after  and  ascer- 
tained :  it  must  be  the  groundwork  of  every  other  ob- 
servation. 

The  reader,  then,  will  please  to  remember  this  word 
undcsignedness,  as  denoting  that  upon  which  the  con- 
struction and  validity  of  our  argument  chiefly  depend. 

As  to  the  proofs  of  undesignedness,  I  shall  in  this  place 
say  little  :  for  I  had  rather  the  reader's  persuasion  should 
arise  from  the  instances  themselves,  and  the  separate  re- 
marks with  which  they  may  be  accompanied,  than  from 
any  previous  formulary  or  description  of  argument.  In 
a  great  plurality  of  examples,  I  trust  he  will  be  perfectly 
convinced  that  no  design  or  contrivance  whatever  has 
been  exercised  ;  and.  if  some  of  the  coincidences  alleged 
appear  to  be  minute,  circuitous,  or  oblique,  let  him  reflect 
that  this  very  indirectness  and  subtilty  is  that  which  gives 
force  and  propriety  to  the  example.  Broad, obvious,  and 
explicit  agreements  prove  little  ;  because  it  may  be  sug- 
gested that  the  insertion  of  such  is  the  ordinary  expedient 
of  every  forgery  :  and,  though  they  may  occur,  and  prob- 
ably will  occur,  in  genuine  writings,  yet  it  cannot  be 
proved  that  they  are  peculiar  to  these.  Thus  what  St. 
Paul  declares,  in  chap.  xi.  of  1  Cor.,  concerning  the  in- 
stitution of  the  eucharist — ,;  For  I  have  received  of  the 
Lord  that  which  I  also  delivered  unto  you,  that  the  Lord 
Jesus,  the  same  night  in  which  he  was  betrayed,  took 
bread  ;  and,  when  he  had   given  thanks,  he  brake  it,  and 

1* 


10  EXPOSITION*    OF    THE    A*TGUM"ENT. 

said,  Take,  eat ;  this  is  my  body,  which  is  broken  for 
you  ;  this  do  in  remembrance  of  me  ;" — though  it  be  in 
close  and  verbal  conformity  with  the  account  of  the  same 
transaction  preserved  by  St.  Luke,  is  yet  a  conformity 
of  which  no  use  can  be  made  in  our  argument ;  for,  if  it 
should  be  objected  that  this  was  a  mere  recital  from  the 
Gospel,  borrowed  by  the  author  of  the  epistle,  for  the 
purpose  of  setting  off  his  composition  by  an  appearance 
of  agreement  with  the  received  account  of  the  Lord's 
supper,  I  should  not  know  how  to  repel  the  insinuation. 
In  like  manner,  the  description  which  St.  Paul  gives  of 
himself  in  his  Epistle  to  the  Philippians  (iii.,  5) — "  Circum- 
cised the  eighth  day,  of  the  stock  of  Israel,  of  the  tribe 
of  Benjamin,  an  Hebrew  of  the  Hebrews  ;  as  touching 
the  law,  a  Pharisee ;  concerning  zeal,  persecuting  the 
Church  ;  touching  the  righteousness  which  is  in  the  law, 
blameless;" — is  made  up  of  particulars  so  plainly  deliv- 
ered concerning  him  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  the 
Epistle  to  the  Romans,  and  the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians, 
that  I  cannot  deny  but  that  it  would  be  easy  for  an  im- 
postor, who  was  fabricating  a  letter  in  the  name  of  St. 
Paul,  to  collect  these  articles  into  one  view.  This,  there- 
fore, is  a  conformity  which  we  do  not  adduce.  But,  when 
I  read,  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  that,  when  "  Paul 
came  to  Derbe  and  Lystra,  behold  a  certain  disciple  was 
there,  named  Timotheus,  the  son  of  a  certain  woman 
which  was  a  Jewess  ;"  and  when,  in  an  epistle  addressed 
to  Timothy,  I  find  him  reminded  of  his  "  having  known 
the  Holy  Scriptures  from  a  child,'"  which  implies  that  he 
must,  on  one  side  or  both,  have  been  brought  up  by  Jewish 
parents  ;  I  conceive  that  I  remark  a  coincidence  which 
shows,  by  its  very  obliquity,  that  scheme  was  not  em- 
ployed in  its  formation.  In  like  manner,  if  a  coincidence 
depend  upon  a  comparison  of  dates,  or  rather  of  circum- 


EXPOSITION    OF    THE    ARGUMENT.  H 

stances  from  which  the  dates  are  gathered — the  more  in- 
tricate that  comparison  shall  be  ;  the  more  numerous  the 
intermediate  steps  through  which  the  conclusion  is  de- 
duced ;  in  a  word,  the  more  circuitous  the  investigation 
is,  the  better,  because  the  agreement  which  finally  results 
is  thereby  farther  removed  from  the  suspicion  of  con- 
trivance, affectation,  or  design.  And  it  should  be  re- 
membered, concerning  these  coincidences,  that  it  is  one 
thing  to  be  minute,  and  another  to  be  precarious  ;  one 
thing  to  be  unobserved,  and  another  to  be  obscure  ;  one 
thing  to  be  circuitous  or  oblique,  and  another  to  be  forced, 
dubious,  or  fanciful.  And  this  distinction  ought  always 
to  be  retained  in  our  thoughts. 

The  very  particularity  of  St.  Paul's  epistles  ;  the  per- 
petual recurrence  of  names  of  persons  and  places ;  the 
frequent  aljusions  to  the  incidents  of  his  private  life,  and 
the  circumstances  of  his  condition  and  history  ;  and  the 
connection  and  parallelism  of  these  with  the  same  cir- 
cumstances in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  so  as  to  enable 
us,  for  the  most  part,  to  confront  them  with  one  another ; 
as  well  as  the  relation  which  subsists  between  the  circum- 
stances, as  mentioned  or  referred  to  in  the  different  epis- 
tles— afford  2io  inconsiderable  proof  of  the  genuineness 
of  the  writings,  and  the  reality  of  the  transactions.  For, 
as  no  advertency  is  sufficient  to  guard  against  slips  and 
contradictions,  when  circumstances  are  multiplied,  and 
when  they  are  liable  to  be  detected  by  contemporary 
accounts  equally  circumstantial,  an  impostor,  I  should 
expect,  would  either  have  avoided  particulars  entirely, 
contenting  himself  with  the  doctrinal  discussions,  moral 
precepts,  and  general  reflections  ;*  or  if,  for  the  sake  of 

*  This,  however,  must  not  be  misunderstood.  A  person  writing  to  his 
friend*,  and  upon  a  sulked  in  which  the  transactions  of  his  lite  were  con- 
cerned, would  probably  be  led  in  the  course  of  his  Jetter,  especially  if  it  was 


12  EXPOSITION    OF    THE    ARGUMENT. 

imitating  St.  Paul's  style,  he  should  have  thought  it  nec- 
essary to  intersperse  his  composition  with  names  and 
circumstances,  he  would  have  placed  them  out  of  the 
reach  of  comparison  with  the  history.  And  I  am  con- 
firmed in  this  opinion  by  the  inspection  of  two  attempts 
to  counterfeit  St.  Paul's  epistles,  which  have  come  down 
to  us  ;  and  the  only  attempts,  of  which  we  have  any 
knowledge,  that  are  at  all  deserving  of  regard.  One  of 
these  is  an  epistle  to  the  Laodiceans,  extant  in  Latin,  and 
preserved  by  Fabricius,  in  his  collection  of  apocryphal 
scriptures.  The  other  purports  to  be  an  epistle  of  St. 
Paul  to  the  Corinthians,  in  answer  to  an  epistle  from  the 
Corinthians  to  him.  This  was  translated  by  Scroderus, 
from  a  copy  in  the  Armenian  language  which  had  been 
sent  to  W.  Whiston,  and  was  afterwards,  from  a  more 
perfect  copy,  procured  at  Aleppo,  published  by  his  sons, 
as  an  appendix  to  their  edition  of  Moses  Chorenensis.  No 
Greek  copy  exists  of  either :  they  are  not  only  not  sup- 
ported by  ancient  testimony,  but  they  are  negatived  and 
excluded  ;  as  they  have  never  found  admission  into  any 
catalogue  of  apostolical  writings,  acknowledged  by,  or 
known  to,  the  early  ages  of  Christianity.  In  the  first  of 
these  I  found,  as  I  expected,  a  total  evitation  of  circum- 
stances. It  is  simply  a  collection  of  sentences  from  the 
canonical  epistles,  strung  together  with  very  little  skill. 
The  3econd,  which  is  a  more  versute  and  specious  forgerv, 

a  long  one,  to  refer  to  passages  found  in  his  history.  A  person  addressing 
an  epistle  to  the  public  at  largo,  or  under  the  form  of  an  epistle  delivering  a 
discourse  upon  some  speculative  argument,  would  not,  it  is  probable,  meet 
with  an  occasion  of  alluding  to  the  circumstances  of  his  life  at  all;  he  might 
or  he  might  not ;  the  chance  on  either  side  is  nearly  equal.  This  is  the  sit- 
uation of  the  catholic  epistles.  Although,  therefore,  the  presence  of  these 
allusions  and  agreements  be  a  valuable  accession  to  the  .•iri.a;:ni>nts  by  which 
the  authenticity  of  a  letter  is  maintained,  yet  the  want  of  them  cenainly 
forms  no  positive  objection. 


EXPOSITION    Or    THE    ARGUMENT.  13 

is  introduced  with  a  list  of  names  of  persons  who  wrote 
to  St.  Paul  from  Corinth  ;  and  is  preceded  by  an  account 
sufficiently  particular  of  the  manner  in  which  the  epistle 
was  sent  from  Corinth  to  St.  Paul,  and  the  answer  re- 
turned. But  they  are  names  which  no  one  ever  heard 
of:  and  the  account  it  is  impossible  to  combine  with  any 
thing  found  in  the  Acts,  or  in  the  other  epistles.  It  is 
not  necessary  for  me  to  point  out  the  internal  marks  of 
spuriousness  and  imposture  which  these  compositions  be- 
tray ;  but  it  was  necessary  to  observe  that  they  do  not 
afford  those  coincidences  which  we  propose  as  proofs  of 
authenticity  in  the  epistles  which  we  defend. 

Having  explained  the  general  scheme  and  formation 
of  the  argument,  I  may  be  permitted  to  subjoin  a  brief 
account  of  the  manner  of  conducting  it. 

I  have  disposed  the  several  instances  of  agreement  un- 
der separate  numbers  :  as  well  to  mark  more  sensibly  the 
divisions  of  the  subject,  as  for  another  purpose,  viz.,  that 
the  reader  may  thereby  be  reminded  that  the  instances 
are  independent  of  one  another.  I  have  advanced  noth- 
ing which  I  did  not  think  probable ;  but  the  degree  of 
probability  by  which  different  instances  are  supported  is 
undoubtedly  very  different.  If  the  reader,  therefore  meets 
with  a  number  which  contains  an  instance  that  appears 
to  him  unsatisfactory,  or  founded  in  mistake,  he  will  dis- 
miss that  number  from  the  argument,  but  without  preju- 
dice to  any  other.  He  will  have  occasion  also  to  observe 
that  the  coincidences  discoverable  in  some  epistles  are 
much  fewer  and  weaker  than  what  are  supplied  by  others. 
But  he  will  add  to  his  observation  this  important  circum- 
stance— that  whatever  ascertains  the  original  of  one  epis- 
tle, in  some  measure,  establishes  the  authority  of  the  rest. 
For,  whether  these  epistles  be  genuine  or  spurious,  every 
thing  about  them  indicates  that  thev  come  from  the  same 


14  EXPOSITION    OF    THE    ARGUMENT. 

hand.  The  diction,  which  it  is  extremely  difficult  to  imi. 
tate,  preserves  its  resemblance  and  peculiarity  through- 
out all  the  epistles.  Numerous  expressions  and  singulari- 
ties of  style,  found  in  no  other  part  of  the  New  Testament, 
are  repeated  in  different  epistles ;  and  occur  in  their  re- 
spective places,  without  the  smallest  appearance  of  force 
or  art.  An  involved  argumentation,  frequent  obscurities, 
especially  in  the  order  and  transition  of  thought,  piety, 
vehemence,  affection,  bursts  of  rapture,  and  of  unparal- 
leled sublimity,  are  properties,  all,  or  most  of  them,  dis- 
cernible in  every  letter  of  the  collection.  But,  although 
these  epistles  bear  strong  marks  of  proceeding  from  the 
same  hand,  I  think  it  is  still  more  certain  that  they  were 
originally  separate  publications.  They  form  no  con- 
tinued story ;  they  compose  no  regular  correspondence ; 
they  comprise  not  the  transactions  of  any  particular  pe- 
riod ;  they  carry  on  no  connection  of  argument ;  they  de- 
pend not  upon  one  another ;  except  in  one  or  two  instan- 
ces, they  refer  not  to  one  another.  I  will  farther  under- 
take to  say,  that  no  study  or  care  has  been  employed 
to  produce  or  preserve  an  appearance  of  consistency 
amongst  them.  All  which  observations  show  that  they 
were  not  intended  by  the  person,  whoever  he  was,  that 
wrote  them,  to  come  forth  or  be  read  together  ;  that  they 
appeared  at  first  separately,  and  have  been  collected 
since. 

The  proper  purpose  of  the  following  work  is  to  bring 
together,  from  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  and  from  the  dif- 
ferent epistles,  such  passages  as  furnish  examples  of  un- 
designed coincidence ;  but  I  have  so  far  enlarged  upon 
this  plan  as  to  take  into  it  some  circumstances,  found  in 
the  epistles,  which  contributed  strength  to  the  conclusion, 
though  not  strictly  objects  of  comparison. 

It  appeared  also  a  part  of  the  same  plan  to  examine  the 


EXPOSITION    OP    THE    ARGUMENT.  15 

difficulties  which  presented  themselves  in  the  course  of 
our  inquiry. 

I  do  not  know  that  the  subject  has  been  proposed  or 
considered  in  this  view  before.  Ludovicus,  Capellus, 
Bishop  Pearson,  Dr.  Benson,  and  Dr.  Lardner,  have  each 
given  a  continued  history  of  St.  Paul  s  life,  made  up  from 
the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  and  the  epistles  joined  together. 
But  this,  it  is  manifest,  is  a  different  undertaking  from  the 
present,  and  directed  to  a  different  purpose. 

If  what  is  here  offered  shall  add  one  thread  to  that  com- 
plication of  probabilities  by  which  the  Christian  history 
is  attested,  the  reader's  attention  will  be  repaid  by  the  su- 
preme importance  of  the  subject ;  and  my  design  will  be 
fully  answered. 


CHAPTER  II 

THE  EPISTLE  TO  THE  ROMANS. 

No.    1. 

The  first  passage  I  shall  produce  from  this  epistle,  and 
upon  which  a  good  deal  of  observation  will  be  founded, 
is  the  following  : 

"  But  now  I  go  unto  Jerusalem,  to  minister  unto  the 
saints  ;  for  it  hath  pleased  them  of  Macedonia  and  Achaia 
to  make  a  certain  contribution  for  the  poor  saints  which 
are  at  Jerusalem."     Rom.  xv.  25,  '26. 

In  this  quotation  three  distinct  circumstances  are  stated  : 
a  contribution  in  Macedonia  for  the  relief  of  the  Chris- 
tians of  Jerusalem  ;  a  contribution  in  Achaia  for  the  same 
purpose  ;  and  an  intended  journey  of  St.  Paul  to  Jerusa- 
lem. These  circumstances  are  stated  as  taking  place  at 
the  same  time,  and  that  to  be  the  time  when  the  epis- 
tle was  written.  Now  let  us  inquire  whether  we  can 
find  these  circumstances  elsewhere;  and  whether,  if  we 
do  find  them,  they  meet  together  in  respect  of  date. 
Turn  to  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  chap,  xx.,  ver.  2,  3,  and 
you  read  the  following  account:  "When  he  had  £one 
over  those  parts  (viz.  Macedonia),  and  had  given  then- 
much  exhortation,  he  came  into  Greece,  and  there  abode 
three  months  ;  and,  when  the  Jews  laid  wait  for  him,  as 
he  was  about  to  sail  into  Syria,  he  proposed  to  return 
through  Macedonia.*'  From  this  passage,  compared  with 
the  account  of  St.  Paul's  travels  given.' before;  and  from 


THE    EPI3TLE    TO    THE    ROMANS.  17 

the  sequel  of  this  chapter,  it  appears  that  upon  St.  Paul's 
second  visit  to  the  peninsula  of  Greece,  his  intention  was, 
when  he  should  leave  the  country,  to  proceed  from 
Achaia  directly  by  sea  to  Syria ;  but  that,  to  avoid  the 
Jews,  who  were  lying  in  wait  to  intercept  him  in  his  route, 
he  so  far  changed  his  purpose  as  to  go  back  through  Ma- 
cedonia, embark  at  Philippi,  and  pursue  his  voyage  from 
thence  towards  Jerusalem.  Here,  therefore,  is  a  journey 
to  Jerusalem  ;  but  not  a  syllable  of  any  contribution.  And, 
as  St.  Paul  had  taken  several  journeys  to  Jerusalem  be- 
fore, and  one  also  immediately  after  his  -first  visit  into 
the  peninsula  of  Greece  (Acts,  xviii.  21),  it  cannot  from 
hence  be  collected  in  which  of  these  visits  the  epistle  was 
written,  or,  with  certainty,  that  it  was  written  in  either. 
The  silence  of  the  historian,  who  professes  to  have  been 
with  St.  Paul  at  the  time,  (xx.  6),  concerning  any  con- 
tribution, might  lead  us.  to  look  out  for  some  different  jour- 
ney, or  might  induce  us,  perhaps,  to  question  the  consist- 
ency of  the  two  records,  did  not  a  very  accidental  refer- 
ence, in  another  part  of  the  same  history,  afford  us  suffi- 
cient ground  to  believe  that  this  silence  was  omission. 
When  St.  Paul  made  his  reply  before  Felix,  to  the  accu- 
sation of  Tertullus,  he  alleged,  as  was  natural,  that  neither 
the  errand  which  brought  him  to  Jerusalem,  nor  his  con- 
duct whilst  he  remained  there,  merited  the  calumnies- 
with  which  the  Jews  had  aspersed  him.  '•  Xow  after 
many  years  (i.  e.  of  absence),  I  came  to  bring  alms  to  my 
nation,  and  offerings ;  whereupon  certain  Jews  from  Asia 
found  me  purified  in  the  temple,  neither  with  multitude 
nor  with  tumult,  who  ought  to  have  been  here  before 
thee,  and  object,  if  they  had  aught  against  me."  Acts, 
xxiv.  17 — 19.  This  mention  of  alms  and  offerings  cer- 
tainly brings  the  narrative  in  the  Acts  nearer  to  an  ao 
eordancy  with  the  epistle  ;  yet  no  one,  I  am  persuaded, 


18  THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    ROMANS. 

will  suspect  that  this  clause  was  put  into  St.  Paul's  de- 
fence, either  to  supply  the  omission  in  the  preceding  nar- 
rative, or  with  any  view  to  such  accordancy. 

After  all,  nothing  is  yet  said  or  hinted  concerning  the 
place  of  the  contribution  ;  nothing  concerning  Macedonia 
and  Achaia.  Turn  therefore  to  the  First  Epistle  to  the 
Corinthians,  chap,  xvi.,  ver.  1 — 4,  and  you  have  St.  Paul 
delivering  the  following  directions :  "  Concerning  the  col- 
lection for  the  saints,  as  I  have  given  orders  to  the 
churches  of  Galatia,  even  so  do  ye ;  upon  the  first  day  ot 
the  week  let  every  one  of  you  lay  by  him  in  store  as  God 
hath  prospered  him,  that  there  be  no  gatherings  when  I 
come.  And,  when  I  come,  whomsoever  you  shall  approve 
by  your  letters,  them  will  I  -send  to  bring  your  liberality 
unto  Jerusalem ;  and,  if  it  be  meet  that  I  go  also,  they 
shall  go  with  me."  In  this  passage  we  find  a  contribu- 
tion carrying  on  at  Corinth,  the  capital  of  Achaia,  for  the 
Christians  of  Jerusalem  ;  we  find  also  a  hint  given  of  the 
possibility  of  St.  Paul  going  up  to  Jerusalem  himself,  after 
he  had  paid  his  visit  into  Achaia :  but  this  is  spoken  of 
rather  as  a  possibility  than  as  any  settled  intention;  for 
his  first  thought  was,  "  Whomsoever  you  shall  approve 
by  your  letters,  them  will  I  send  to  bring  your  liberality 
to  Jerusalem :"  and  in  the  sixth  verse  he  adds,  "  That  ye 
may  bring  me  on  my  journey  whithersoever  I  go."  This 
epistle  purports  to  be  written  after  St.  Paul  had  been  at 
Corinth ;  for  it  refers  throughout  to  what  he  had  done 
and  said  amongst  them  whilst  he  was  there.  The  ex- 
pression, therefore,  "  when  I  come,"  must  relate  to  a  sec- 
ond visit ;  against  which  visit  the  contribution  spoken  of 
was  desired  to  be  in  readiness. 

But,  though  the  contribution  in  Achaia  be  expressly 
mentioned,  nothing  is  here  said  concerning  any  contribu- 
tion in  Macedonia.     Tarn,  therefore,  m  the  third  place4 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    ROMANS.  if) 

to  the  Second  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  chap:  viii.,  ver. 
I — 4,  and  you  will  discover  the  particular  which  remains 
to  be  sought  for :  "  Moreover,  brethren,  we  do  you  to  wit 
of  the  grace  of  God  bestowed  on  the  churches  of  Macedo- 
nia ;  how  that,  in  a  great  trial  of  affliction,  the  abundance 
of  their  joy  and  their  deep  poverty  abounded  unto  the 
riches  of  their  liberality  ;  for  to  their  power,  I  bear  record, 
yea,  and  beyond  their  power,  they  were  willing  of  them- 
selves ;  praying  us,  with  much  entreaty,  that  we  would 
receive  the  gift,  and  take  upon  us  the  fellowship  of  the 
ministering  to  the  saints."  To  which  add,  chap,  ix.,  ver. 
2 :  "■  I  know  the  forwardness  of  your  mind,  for  which  I 
boast  of  you  to  them  of  Macedonia,  that  Achaia  was  ready 
a  year  ago."  In  this  epistle  we  find  St.  Paul  advanced 
as  far  as  Macedonia,  upon  that  second  visit  to  Corinth 
which  he  promised  in  his  former  epistle :  we  find  also,  in 
the  passages  now  quoted  from  it,  that  a  contribution  was 
going  on  in  Macedonia  at  the  same  time  with,  or  soon 
however  following,  the  contribution  which  was  made  in 
Achaia ;  but  for  whom  the  contribution  was  made  does 
not  appear  in  this  epistle  at  all ;  that  information  must  be' 
supplied  from  the  first  epistle. 

Here  therefore,  at  length,  but  fetched'  from  three  dif- 
ferent writings,  we  have  obtained  the  several  circum- 
stances we  inquired  after,  and  which  the  Epistle  to  the 
Romans  brings  together :  viz.  a  contribution  in  Achaia 
for  the  Christians  of  Jerusalem;  a  contribution  in  Mace- 
donia for  the  same;  and  an  approaching  journey  of  St. 
Paul  to  Jerusalem.  We  have  these  circumstances — each 
by  some  hint  in  the  passage  in  which  it  is  mentioned,  or 
by  the  date  of  the  writing  in  which  the  passage  occurs — 
fixed  to  a  particular  time  ;  and  we  have  that  time  turning 
out,  upon  examination,  to  be  in  all  the  same;  namely, 
towards  the  close  of  St.  Paul's  second  visit  to  the  penin- 


20  THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    ROMANS. 

sula  of  Greece.  This  is  an  instance  of  conformity  "beyond 
the  possibility,  I  will  venture  to  say,  of  random  writing 
to  produce.  I  also  assert  that  it  is  in  the  highest  degree 
improbable  that  it  should  have  been  the  effect  of  contriv- 
ance and  design.  The  imputation  of  design  amounts  to 
this  :  that  the  forger  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  inserted 
in  it  the  passage  upon  which  our  observations  are  founded, 
for  the  purpose  of  giving  color  to  his  forgery  by  the  ap- 
pearance of  conformity  with  other  writings  which  were 
then  extant.  I  reply,  in  the  first  place,  that,  if  he  did  this 
to  countenance  his  forgery,  he  did  it  for  the  purpose  of 
an  argument  which  would  not  strike  one  reader  in  ten 
thousand.  Coincidences  so  circuitous  as  this  answer  not 
the  ends  of  forgery;  are  seldom,  I  believe,  attempted  by 
it.  In  the  second  place  I  observe  that  he  must  have  had 
the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  and  the  two  epistles  to  the  Co- 
rinthians before  him  at  the  time.  In  the  Acts  of  the 
Apostles  (I  mean  that  part  of  the  Acts  which  relates  to 
this  period),  he  would  have  found  the  journey  to  Jerusa- 
lem ;  but  nothing  about  the  contribution.  In  the  First 
Epistle  to  the  Corinthians  he  would  have  found  a  contri- 
bution going  on  in  Achaia  for  the  Christians  of  Jerusa- 
lem, and  a  distant  hint  of  the  possibility  of  the  journey  ; 
but  nothing  concerning  a  contribution  in  Macedonia.  In 
the  Second  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  he  would  have 
found  a  contribution  in  Macedonia  accompanying  that  in 
Achaia ;  but  no  intimation  for  whom  either  was  intended, 
and  not  a  word  about  the  journey.  It  was  only  by  a 
close  and  attentive  collation  of  the  three  writings  that  he 
could  have  picked  out  the  circumstances  which  he  has 
united  in  his  epistle;  and  by  a  still  more  nice  examination 
that  he  could  have  determined  them  to  belong  to  the  same 
period.  In  the  third  place,  I  remark,  what  diminishes 
very  much  the  suspicion  of  fraud,  how  aptly  and  connect- 


THE    EPI>TLE    TO    THE    ROMANS.  21 

edly  the  mention  of  the  circumstances  in  question,  viz. 
the  journey  to  Jerusalem,  and  of  the  occasion  of  that 
journey,  arises  from  the  context :  "  Whensoever  I  take 
my  journey  into  Spain,  I  will  come  to  you  ;  for  I  trust  to 
see  you  in  my  journey,  and  to  be  brought  on  my  way 
thitherward  by  you,  if  first  I  be  somewhat  filled  with  your 
company.  But  now  I  go  unto  Jerusalem,  to  minister  unto 
the  saints  ;  for  it  hath  pleased  them  of  Macedonia  and 
Achaia  to  make  a  certain  contribution  for  the  poor  saints 
which  are  at  Jerusalem.  It  hath  pleased  them  verily,  and 
their  debtors  they  are  ;  for,  if  the  Gentiles  have  been  made 
partakers  of  their  spiritual  things,  their  duty  is  also  to 
minister  unto  them  in  carnal  things.  When  therefore  I 
have  performed  this,  and  have  sealed  to  them  this  fruit,  I 
will  come  by  you  into  Spain."  Is  the  passage  in  Italics 
like  a  passage  foisted  in  for  an  extraneous  purpose  ? 
Does  it  not  aYise  from  what  goes  before,  by  a  junction  as 
easy  as  any  example  of  writing  upon  real  business  can 
furnish?  Could  any  thing  be  more  natural  than  that  St. 
Paul,  in  writing  to  the  Romans,  should  speak  of  the  time 
when  he  hoped  to  visit  them ;  should  mention  the  busi- 
ness which  then  detained  him ;  and  that  he  purposed  to 
set  forwards  upon  his  journey  to  them  when  that  business 
was  completed  ? 


No.   II. 

By  means  of  the  quotation  which  formed  the  subject  of 
the  preceding  number,  we  collect  that  the  Epistle  to  the 
Romans  was  written  at  the  conclusion  of  St.  Paul's  sec- 
ond visit  to  the  peninsula  of  Greece ;  but  this  we  collect, 
not  from  the  epistle  itself,  nor  from  any  thing  declared 
concerning  the  time  and  place  in  any  part  of  the  epistle, 


22  THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    ROMANS. 

but  from  a  comparison  of  circumstances  referred  to  in  tha 
epistle  with  the  order  of  events  recorded  in  the  Acts,  and 
with  reference  to  the  same  circumstances,  though  for 
quite  different  purposes,  in  the  two  epistles  to  the  Corin- 
thians. Now  would  the  author  of  a  forgery,  who  sought 
to  gain  credit  to  a  spurious  letter  by  congruities  depend- 
ing upon  the  time  and  place  in  which  the  letter  was  sup- 
posed to  be  written,  have  left  that  time  and  place  to  be 
made  out  in  a  manner  so  obscure  and  indirect  as  this  is  ? 
If  therefore  coincidences  of  circumstance  can  be  pointed 
out  in  this  epistle,  depending  upon  its  date,  or  the  place 
where  it  was  written,  whilst  that  date  and  place  are  only 
ascertained  by  other  circumstances,  such  coincidences 
may  fairly  be  stated  as  undesigned.  Under  this  head  I 
adduce 

Chap,  xvi.,  21 — 23.  "  Timotheus,  my  work-fellow,  and 
Lucius,  and  Jason,  and  Sosipater,  my  kinsmen,  salute  you> 
I,  Tertius,  who  wrote  this  epistle,  salute  you  in  the  Lord. 
Gaius,  mine  host,  and  of  the  whole  church,  saluteth  you ; 
and  Quartus,  a  brother."  With  this  passage  I  compare 
Acts,  xx.  4:  "And  there  accompanied  him  into  Asia, 
Sopater  of  Berea ;  and,  of  the  Thessalonians,  Aristar- 
chus  and  Secundus  ;  and  Gaius  of  Derbe,  and  Timotheus; 
and  of  Asia,  Tychicus  and  Trophimus."  The  Epistle  to 
the  Romans,  we  have  seen,  was  written  just  before  St. 
Paul's  departure  from  Greece,  after  his  second  visit  to 
that  peninsula :  the  persons  mentioned  in  the  quotation 
from  the  Acts  are  those  who  accompanied  him  in  that 
departure.  Of  seven  whose  names  are  joined  in  the  sal- 
utation of  the  church  of  Rome,  three,  viz.  Sosipater, 
Gaius.  and  Timothy,  are  proved,  by  this  passage  in  the 
Acts,  to  have  been  with  St.  Paul  at  the  time.  And  this 
is  perhaps  as  much  coincidence  as  could  be  expected 
from  reality,  though  less.  I  am  apt  to  think,  than  would 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    ROMANS.  23 

have  been  produced  by  design.  Four  are  mentioned  in 
the  Acts  who  are  not  joined  in  the  salutation  ;  and  it  is 
in  the  nature  of  the  case  probable  that  there  should  be 
many  attending  St.  Paul  in  Greece,  who  knew  nothing 
of  the  converts  at  Rome,  nor  were  known  by  them.  In 
like  manner,  several  are  joined  in  the  salutation  who  are 
not  mentioned  in  the  passage  referred  to  in  the  Acts. 
This  also  was  to  be  expected.  The  occasion  of  mention- 
ing them  in  the  Acts  was  their  proceeding  with  St.  Paul 
upon  his  journey.  But  we  may  be  sure  that  there  were 
many  eminent  Christians  with  St.  Paul  in  Greece,  besides 
those  who  accompanied  him  into  Asia.* 

But,  if  any  one  shall  still  contend  that  a  forger  of  the 
epistle,  with  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  before  him,  and 
having  settled  this  scheme  of  writing  a  letter  as  from  St. 
Paul  upon  his  second  visit  into  Greece,  would  easily  think 
of  the  expedient  of  putting  in  the  names  of  those  persons 
who  appeared  to  be  with  St.  Paul  at  the  time,  as  an  ob- 
vious recommendation  of  the  imposture,  I  then  repeat  my 

*  Of  these  Jason  is  one,  whose  presence  upon  this  occasion  is  very  natu- 
rally accounted  for.  Jason  was  an  inhabitant  of  Thessalonica  in  Mace- 
donia, and  entertained  St.  Paul  in  his  house  upon  his  first  visit  to  that 
country.  Acts,  xvii.  7. — St.  Paul,  upon  this  his  second  visit,  passed  through 
Macedonia  on  his  way  to  Greece,  and,  from  the  situation  of  Thessalonica, 
most  likely  through  that  city.  It  appears,  from  various  instances  in  t'.ie 
Acts,  to  have  been  the  practice  of  many  converts  to  attend  St.  Paul  from 
place  to  place.  It  is  therefore  highly  probable,  I  mean  that  it  is  highly  con- 
sistent with  the  account  in  the  history,  that  Jason,  according  to  that  ac- 
count a  zealous  disciple,  the  inhabitant  of  a  city  at  no  gnat  distance  from 
Greece,  and  through  which,  as  it  should  seem,  St.  Paul  had  lately  passed, 
should  have  accompanied  St.  Paul  into  Greece,  and  have  been  with  him 
thereat  this  time.  Lucius  is  another  name  in  the  epistle.  A  very  slight 
alteration  would  convert  A  n  .,  .-  mt  i  A  i  »rn$,  Lucius  into  Luke,  which  would 
produce  an  additional  coincidence;  for  if  Luke  was  the  author  of  the  his- 
tory, he  was  with  St.  Paul  at  the  time;  inasmuch  as  describing  the  voyage 
which  took  place  soon  after  the  writing  of  this  epistle,  the  historian  uses  the 
Irst  person — "  We  sailed  away  from  Philippi."  Acts,  xx.  ti. 


24  THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    ROMANS. 

observations :  first,  that  he  would  have  made  the  catalogue 
more  complete;  and,  secondly,  that,  with  this  contrivance 
in  his  thoughts,  it  was  certainly  his  business,  in  order  to 
avail  himself  of  the  artifice,  to  have  stated,  in  the  body 
of  the  epistle,  that  Paul  was  in  Greece  when  he  wrote  it, 
and  that  he  was  there  upon  his  second  visit.  Neither  of 
which  he  has  done,  either  directly  or  even  so  as  to  be 
discoverable  by  any  circumstance  found  in  the  narrative 
delivered  in  the  Acts. 

Under  the  same  head,  viz.  of  coincidences  depending 
upon  date,  I  cite  from  the  epistle  the  following  salutation : 
"  Greet  Priscilla  and  Aquila,  my  helpers  in  Christ  Jesus, 
who  have  for  my  life  laid  down  their  own  necks  ;  unto 
whom  not  only  I  give  thanks,  but  also  all  the  churches 
of  the  Gentiles."  Chap.  xvi.  3. — It  appears,  from  the 
Acts  of  the  Apostles,  that  Priscilla  and  Aquila  had  orig- 
inally been  inhabitants  of  Rome  ;  for  we  read,  Acts,  xviii. 
2,  that  "  Paul  found  a  certain  Jew,  named  Aquila,  lately 
come  from  Italy  with  his  wife  Priscilla,  because  that 
Claudius  had  commanded  all  Jews  to  depart  from  Rome." 
They  were  connected,  therefore,  with  the  place  to  which 
the  salutations  are  sent.  That  is  one  coincidence;  an- 
other is  the  following  :  St.  Paul  became  acquainted  with 
these  persons  at  Corinth  during  his  first  visit  into  Greece. 
They  accompanied  him  upon  his  return  into  Asia  ;  were 
settled  some  time  at  Ephesus,  Acts,  xviii.  19 — 2G ;  and 
'  appear  to  have  been  with  St.  Paul  when  he  wrote  from 
that  place  his  First  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  1  Cor.  xvi. 
19.  Not  long  after  the  writing  of  which  epistle  St.  Paul 
went   from  into  Macedonia,  and,  "  after  he  had 

gone  over  those  parts,"  proceeded  from  thence  upon  his 
second  visit  into  Greece,  (lining  which  visit,  or  rather  at 
the  conclusion  of  it,  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  as  hath 
been  shown,  was  written.     We  have  therefore  the  time 


THE    EriSTLE    TO    THE    ROMANS.  -  25 

of  St.  Paul's  residence  at  Ephesus  after  he  had  written  to 
the  Corinthians,  the  time  taken  up  by  his  progress  through 
Macedonia,  (which  is  indefinite,  and  was  probably  con- 
siderable,) and  his  three  months  abode  in  Greece  ;  we 
have  the  sum  of  those  three  periods  allowed  for  Aquila 
and  Priscilla  going  back  to  Rome,  so  as  to  be  there  when 
the  epistle  before  us  was  written.  Now,  what  this  quo- 
tation leads  us  to  observe  is,  the  danger  of  scattering 
names  and  circumstances  in  writings  like  the  present, 
how  implicated  they  often  are  with  dates  and  places,  and 
that  nothing  but  truth  can  preserve  consistency.  Had 
the  notes  of  time  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  fixed  the 
writing  of  it  to  any  date  prior  to  St.  Paul's  first  residence 
at  Corinth,  the  salutation  of  Aquila  and  Priscilla  would 
have  contradicted  the  history,  because  it  would  have 
been  prior  to  his  acquaintance  with  these  persons.  If 
the  notes  of  time  had  fixed  it  to  any  period  during  that 
residence  at  Corinth,  during  his  journey  to  Jerusalem 
when  he  first  returned  out  of  Greece,  during  his  stay  at 
Antioch,  whither  he  went  down  to  Jerusalem,  or  during 
his  second  progress  through  the  Lesser  Asia,  upon  which 
he  proceeded  from  Antioch,  an  equal  contradiction  would 
have  been  incurred  ;  because,  from  Acts,  xviii.  2 — 18,  19 
— 26,  it  appears  that  during  all  this  time  Aquila  and  Pris- 
cilla were  either  along  with  St.  Paul,  or  were  abiding  at 
Ephesus.  Lastly,  had  the  notes  of  time  in  this  epistle, 
which  we  have  seen  to  be  perfectly  incidental,  compared 
with  the  notes  of  time  in  the  First  Epistle  to  the  Corin- 
thians, which  are  equally  incidental,  fixed  this  epistle  to 
be  either  contemporary  with  that,  or  prior  to  it,  a  similar 
contradiction  would  have  ensued  ;  because,  first,  when 
the  epistle  to  the  Corinthians  was  written.  Aquila  and 
Priscilla  were  along  with  St.  Paul,  as  they  joined  in  the 
salutation  of  tWat  church,  1  Cor.  xvi.  19;  and  because, 
2 


26  THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    ROMANS. 

secondly,  the  history  does  not  allow  us  to  suppose  that 
between  the  time  of  their  becoming  acquainted  with  St. 
Paul,  and  the  time  of  St.  Paul's  writing  to  the  Corinthians, 
Aquila  and  Priscilla  could  have  gone  to  Rome,  so  as  to 
have  been  saluted  in  an  epistle  to  that  city  ;  and  then 
come  back  to  St.  Paul  at  Ephesus,  so  as  to  be  joined  with 
him  in  saluting  the  church  of  Corinth.  As  it  is,  all  things 
are  consistent.  The  Epistle  to  the  Romans  is  posterior 
even  to  the  Second  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians  ;  because 
it  speaks  of  a  contribution  in  Achaia  being  completed, 
which  the  Second  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  chap,  viii., 
is  only  soliciting.  It  is  sufficiently,  therefore,  posterior 
to  the  First  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  to  allow  time  in 
the  interval  for  Aquila  and  Priscilla's  return  from  Ephe- 
sus to  Rome. 

Before  we  dismiss  these  two  persons,  we  may  take 
notice  of  the  terms  of  commendation  in  which  St.  Paul 
describes  them,  and  of  the  agreement  of  that  encomium 
with  the  history.  "  My  helpers  in  Christ  Jesus,  who 
have  for  my  life  laid  down  their  necks  ;  unto  whom  not 
only  I  give  thanks,  but  also  all  the  churches  of  the  Gen- 
tiles." In  the  eighteenth  chapter  of  the  Acts  we  are 
informed  that  Aquila  and  Priscilla  were  Jews  ;  that  St. 
Paul  first  met  with  them  at  Corinth  ;  that  for  some  time 
he  abode  in  the  same  house  with  them  ;  that  St.  Paul's 
contention  at  Corinth  was  with  the  unbelieving  Jews, 
who  at  first  "  opposed  and  blasphemed,  and  afterwards, 
with  one  accord  raised  an  insurrection  against  him  ;"  that 
Aquila  and  Priscilla  adhered,  we  may  conclude,  to  St. 
Paul  throughout  this  whole  contest ;  for,  when  he  left 
the  city  they  went  with  him,  Acts,  xviii.  18.  Under 
these  circumstances,  it  is  highly  probable  that  they  should 
be  involved  in  the  dangers  and  persecutions  which  St. 
Paul  underwent  from  the  Jews,  being  themselves  Jews ; 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    ROMANS.  27 

and,  by  adhering  to  St.  Paul  in  this  dispute,  deserters,  as 
they  would  be  accounted,  of  the  Jewish  cause.  Farther, 
as  they,  though  Jews,  were  assisting  to  St.  Paul  in  preach- 
ing to  the  Gentiles  at  Corinth,  they  had  taken  a  decided 
part  in  the  great  controversy  of  that  day,  the  admission 
of  the  Gentiles  to  a  parity  of  religious  situation  with  the 
Jews.  For  this  conduct  alone,  if  there  was  no  other 
reason,  they  may  seem  to  have  been  entitled  to  "  thanks 
from  the  churches  of  the  Gentiles."  They  were  Jews 
taking  part  with  Gentiles.  Yet  is  all  this  so  indirectly 
intimated,  or  rather  so  much  of  it  left  to  inference,  in  the 
account  given  in  the  Acts,  that  I  do  not  think  it  probable 
that  a  forger  either  could  or  would  have  drawn  his  rep- 
resentation from  thence  ;  and  still  less  probable  do  I  think 
it  that,  without  having  seen  the  Acts,  he  could,  by  mere 
accident,  and  without  truth  for  his  guide,  have  delivered 
a  representation  so  conformable  to  the  circumstances 
there  recorded. 

The  two  congruities  last  adduced  depended  upon  the 
time,  the  two  following  regard  the  place,  of  the  epistle. 

1.  Chap.  xvi.  23.  "  Erastus,  the  chamberlain  of  the 
city,  saluteth  you" — of  what  city?  We  have  seen,  that 
is,  we  have  inferred,  from  circumstances  found  in  the 
epistle,  compared  with  circumstances  found  in  the  Acts 
of  the  Apostles,  and  in  the  two  epistles  to  the  Corinthians, 
that  our  epistle  was  written  during  St.  Paul's  second  visit 
to  the  peninsula  of  Greece.  Again,  as  St.  Paul,  in  his 
epistle  to  the  church  of  Corinth,  1  Cor.  xvi.  3,  speaks  of 
a  collection  going  on  in  that  city,  and  of  his  desire  that  it 
might  be  ready  against  he  came  thither  ;  and,  as  in  this 
epistle  he  speaks  of  that  collection  being  ready,  it  follows 
that  the  epistle  was  written  either  whilst  he  was  at  Cor- 
inth, or  after  he  had  been  there.  Thirdly,  since  St.  Paul 
speaks  in  this  epistle  of  his  journey  to  Jerusalem,  as  about 


28  THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    ROMANS. 

instantly  to  take  place  ;  and  as  we  learn,  Acts,  xx.  3, 
that  his  design  and  attempt  was  to  sail  upon  that  journey 
immediately  from  Greece,  properly  so  called,  i.  e.  as  dis- 
tinguished from  Macedonia ;  it  is  probable  that  he  was 
in  this  country  when  he  wrote  the  epistle,  in  which  he 
speaks  of  himself  as  upon  the  eve  of  setting  out.  If  in 
Greece,  he  was  most  likely  at  Corinth ;  for  the  two  epis- 
tles to  the  Corinthians  show  that  the  principal  end  of  his 
coming  into  Greece  was  to  visit  that  city,  where  he 
had  founded  a  church.  Certainly  we  know  no  place  in 
Greece  in  which  his  presence  was  so  probable  :  at  least, 
the  placing  of  him  at  Corinth  satisfies  every  circum- 
stance. Now,  that  Erastus  was  an  inhabitant  of  Corinth, 
or  had  some  connection  with  Corinth,  is  rendered  a  fair 
subject  of  presumption,  by  that  which  is  accidentally  said 
of  him  in  the  Second  Epistle  to  Timothy,  chap.  iii.  20 : 
"  Erastus  abode  at  Corinth."  St.  Paul  complains  of  his 
solitude,  and  is  telling  Timothy  what  was  become  of  his 
companions  :  "  Erastus  abode  at  Corinth  ;  but  Trophimus 
have  I  left  at  Miletum,  sick."  Erastus  was  one  of  those 
who  had  attended  St.  Paul  in  his  travels,  Acts  xix.  22 ; 
and  when  those  travels  had,  upon  some  occasion,  brought 
our  apostle  and  his  train  to  Corinth,  Erastus  staid  there, 
for  no  reason  so  probable  as  that  it  was  his  home.  I  al- 
low that  this  coincidence  is  not  so  precise  as  some  others, 
yet  I  think  it  too  clear  to  be  produced  by  accident ;  for, 
of  the  many  places  which  this  same  epistle  has  assigned 
to  different  persons,  and  the  innumerable  others  which  it 
might  have  mentioned,  how  came  it  to  fix  upon  Corinth 
for  Erastus  ?  And,  as  far  as  it  is  a  coincidence,  it  is  cer- 
tainly undesigned  on  the  part  of  the  author  of  the  epistle 
to  the  Romans ;  because  he  has.  not  told  us  of  what  city 
Erastus  was  the  chamberlain  ;  or,  which  is  the  same 
thing,  from  what  city  the  epistle  was  written,  the  setting 


THE    KPISTLE    TO    THE    ROMANS.  21) 

forth  of  which  was  absolutely  necessary  to  the  display 
of  the  coincidence,  if  any  such  display  had  been  thought 
of:  nor  could  the  author  of  the  Epistle  to  Timothy  leave 
Erastus  at  Corinth,  from  any  thing  he  might  have  read 
in  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  because  Corinth  is  nowhere 
in  that  epistle  mentioned  either  by  name  or  description. 

2.  Chap.  xvi.  1 — 3.  "  I  commend  unto  you  Phoebe, 
our  sister,  which  is  a  servant  of  the  church  which  is  at 
Cenchrea,  that  ye  receive  her  in  the  Lord,  as  becometh 
saints,  and  that  ye  assist  her  in  whatsoever  business  she 
hath  need  of  you  :  for  she  hath  been  a  succorer  of  many, 
and  of  myself  also."  Cenchrea  adjoined  to  Corinth  ;  St. 
Paul  therefore,  at  the  time  of  writing  the  letter,  was  in 
the  neighborhood  of  the  woman  whom  he  thus  recom- 
mends. But,  farther,  that  St.  Paul  had  before  this  been 
at  Cenchrea  itself,  appears  from  the  eighteenth  chapter 
of  the  Acts  ;  and  appears  by  a  circumstance  as  incidental, 
and  as  unlike  design,  as  any  that  can  be  imagined.  "  Paul 
after  this  tarried  there  (viz.  at  Corinth)  yet  a  good  while, 
and  then  took  his  leave  of  his  brethren,  and  sailed  thence 
into  Syria,  and  with  him  Priscilla  and  Aquila,  having 
shorn  his  head  in  Cenchrea,  for  he  had  a  vow  ;"  xviii.  18. 
The  shaving  of  the  head  denoted  the  expiration  of  the 
Nazaritic  vow.  The  historian,  therefore,  by  the  mention 
of  this  circumstance,  virtually  tells  us  that  St.  Paul's  vow 
was  expired  before  he  set, forward  upon  his  voyage,  hav- 
ing deferred  probably  his  departure  until  he  should  be 
released  from  the  restrictions  under  which  his  vow  laid 
him.  Shall  we  say  that  the  author  of  the  Acts  of  the 
Apostles  feigned  this  anecdote  of  St.  Paul  at  Cenchrea, 
because  he  had  read  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  that 
*c  Phoebe,  a  servant  of  the  church  of  Cenchrea,  had  been 
a  succorer  of  many  and  of  him  also  ?"  or  shall  we  say 
that  the  author  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  out  of  his 


30  THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    ROMANS. 

own  imagination,  created  Phoebe  "a  servant  of  the  church 
at  Cenchrea"  because  he  read  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles 
that  Paul  had  "  shorn  his  head"  in  that  place  ? 


.      No.   III. 

Chap.  i.  13.  "  Now  I  would  not  have  you  ignorant, 
brethren,  that  oftentimes  I  purposed  to  come  unto  you,  but 
was  let  hitherto,  that  I  might  have  some  fruit  among  you 
also,  even  as  among  other  Gentiles."  Again,  xv.  23,  24. 
a  But  now  having  no  more  place  in  these  parts,  and  hav- 
ing a  great  desire  these  many  years  (nollaf  oftentimes)  to 
come  unto  you,  whensoever  I  take  my  journey  into  Spain 
I  will  come  to  you  ;  for  I  trust  to  see  you  in  my  journey, 
and  to  be  brought  on  my  way  thitherward  by  you  ;  but 
now  I  go  up  unto  Jerusalem,  to  minister  to  the  saints. 
When,  therefore,  I  have  performed  this,  and  have  sealed 
to  them  this  fruit,  I  will  come  by  you  into  Spain." 

With  these  passages  compare  Acts,  xix.  21  :  "After 
these  things  were  ended  (viz.  at  Ephesus),  Paul  purposed 
in  the  spirit,  when  he  had  passed  through  Macedonia  and 
Achaia,  to  go  to  Jerusalem ;  saying,  After  I  have  been 
there,  I  must  also  see  Rome." 

Let  it  be  observed  that  our  epistle  purports  to  have 
been  written  at  the  conclusion  of  St.  Paul's  second  jour- 
ney into  Greece ;  that  the  quotation  from  the  Acts  con- 
tains words  said  to  have  been  spoken  by  St.  Paul  at  Eph- 
es*us,  some  time  before  he  set  forwards  upon  that  journey. 
Now  I  contend  that  it  is  impossible  that  two  independent 
fictions  should  have  attributed  to  St.  Paul  the  same  pur- 
pose, especially  a  purpose  so  specific  and  particular  as 
this,  which  was  not  merely  a  general  design  of  visiting 
Rome  after  he  had  passed  through  Macedonia  and  Achaia, 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    ROMANS.  31 

and  after  he  had  performed  a  voyage  from  these  countries 
to  Jerusalem.  The  conformity  between  the  history  and 
the  epistle  is  perfect.  In  the  first  quotation  from  the" 
epistle  we  find  that  a  design  of  visiting  Rome  had  long 
dwelt  in  the  apostle's  mind :  in  the  quotation  from  the 
Acts,  we  find  that  design  expressed  a  considerable  time 
before  the  epistle  was  written.  In  the  history,  we  find 
that  the  plan  which  St.  Paul  had  formed  was,  to  pass 
through  Macedonia  and  Achaia ;  after  that  to  go  to  Jeru- 
salem ;  and,  when  he  had  finished  his  visit  there,  to  sail 
for  Rome.  When  the  epistle  was  written,  he  had  ex- 
ecuted so  much  of  his  plan  as  to  have  passed  through 
Macedonia  and  Achaia ;  and  was  preparing  to  pursue 
the  remainder  of  it,  by  speedily  setting  out  towards  Jeru- 
salem :  and  in  this  point  of  his  travels  he  tells  his  friends 
at  Rome  that,  when  he  had  completed  the  business  which 
carried  him  to  Jerusalem,  he  would  come  to  them.  Sec- 
ondly, I  say  that  the  very  inspection  of  the  passages  will 
satisfy  us  that  they  were  not  made  up  from  one  another. 

"Whensoever  I  take  my  journey  into  Spain,  I  will 
come  to  you  ;  for  I  trust  to  see  you  in  my  journey,  and  to 
be  brought  on  my  way  thitherward  by  you:  but  now  I 
go  up  to  Jerusalem,  to  minister  to  the  saints.  When, 
therefore,  I  have  performed  this,  and  have  sealed  to  them 
this  fruit,  I  will  come  by  you  into  Spain." — This  from  the 
epistle. 

"  Paul  purposed  in  the  spirit,  when  he  had  passed 
thrugh  Macedonia  and  Achaia,  to  go  to  Jerusalem  ;  say- 
ing, After  I  have  been  there,  I  must  also  see  Rome.'" — 
This  from  the  Acts. 

If  the  passage  in  the  epistle  was  taken  from  that  in  the 
Acts,  why  was  Spain  put  in?  If  the  passage  in  the  Acts 
was  taken  from  that  in  the  epistle,  why  was  Spain  left 
out  ?     If  the  two  passages  were  unknown  to  each  other. 


32  THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    ROMANS. 

nothing  can  account  for  their  conformity  but  truth. 
Whether  we  suppose  the  history  and  the  epistle  to  be 
alike  fictitious,  or  the  history  to  be  true  but  the  letter  spu- 
rious, or  the  letter  to  be  genuine  but  the  history  a  fable, 
the  meeting  with  this  circumstance  in  both,  if  neither 
borrowed  it  from  the  other,  is,  upon  all  these  suppositions, 
equally  inexplicable. 


No.  IV. 

The  following  quotation  I  offer  for  the  purpose  of 
pointing  out  a  geographical  coincidence,  of  so  much  im- 
portance that  Dr.  Lardner  considered  it  as  a  confirma- 
tion of  the  whole  history  of  St.  Paul's  travels. 

Chap,  xv.,  19.  "So  that  from  Jerusalem,  and  round 
about  unto  Ulyricum,  I  have  fully  preached  the  Gospel  of 
Christ." 

I  do  not  think  that  these  words  necessarily  import  that 
St.  Paul  had  penetrated  into  Ulyricum,  or  preached  the 
Gospel  in  that  province  ;  but  rather  that  he  had  come  to 
the  confines  of  Ulyricum,  (,««/?« *«  IXXvqixs),  and  that  these 
confines  were  the  external  boundary  of  his  travels.  St. 
Paul  considers  Jerusalem  as  the  centre,  and  is  here  view- 
ing the  circumference  to  which  his  travels  extended. 
The  form  of  expression  in  the  original  conveys  this  idea — 

ano  'Iequffuhjit    teat   xi/xP.qj  fiF'/Qi  t«  IlXvoixe.      Ulyricum    was 

the  part  of  this  circle  which  he  mentions  in  an  epistle  to 
the  Romans,  because  it  lay  in  a  direction  from  Jerusalem 
towards  that  city,  and  pointed  out  to  the  Roman  readers 
the  nearest  place  to  them,  to  which  his  travels  from  Jeru- 
lem  had  brought  him.  The  name  cf  Ulyricum  nowhere 
occurs  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles ;  no  suspicion,  there- 
fore, can  be  received  that  the  mention  of  it  was  borrowed 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    ROMANS.  33 

from  thence.  Yet  I  think  it  appears,  from  these  same 
Acts,  that  St.  Paul,  before  the  time  when  he  wrote  his 
Epistle  to  the  Romans,  had  reached  the  confines  of  Illyri- 
cum ;  or,  however,  that  he  might  have  clone  so,  in  perfect 
consistency  with  the  account  there  delivered.  Illyricum 
adjoins  upon  Macedonia ;  measuring  from  Jerusalem  to- 
wards Rome,  it  lies  close  behind  it.  If,  therefore,  St 
Paul  traversed  the  whole  country  of  Macedonia,  the  route 
would  necessarily  bring  him  to  the  confines  of  Illyricum, 
and  these  confines  would  be  described  as  the  extremity 
of  his  journey.  Now,  the  account  of  St.  Paul's  second 
visit  to  the  peninsula  of  Greece  is  contained  in  these 
words :  "  He  departed  for  to  go  into  Macedonia ;  and 
when  he  had  gone  over  these  parts,  and  had  given  them 
much  exhortation,  he  came  into  Greece."  Acts,  xx.  2. 
This  account  allows,  or  rather  leads,  us  to  suppose  that 
St.  Paul,  in  going  over  Macedonia  (ihei.6a>y  t«  (isqij  exeiva,} 
had  passed  so  far  to  the  west  as  to  come  into  those  parts 
of  the  country  which  were  contiguous  to  Illyricum,  if  he 
did  not  enter  into  Illyricum  itself.  The  history,  there- 
fore, and  the  epistle  so  far  agree,  and  the  agreement  is 
much  strengthened  by  a  coincidence  of  time.  At  the 
time  the  epistle  was  written,  St.  Paul  might  say,  in  con- 
formity with  the  history,  that  he  had  "  come  into  Illyri- 
cum ;"  much  before  that  time,  he  could  not  have  said  so ; 
for,  upon  his  former  journey  to  Macedonia,  his  route  is 
laid  down  from  the  time  of  his  landing  at  Philippi  to  his 
sailing  from  Corinth.  We  trace  him  from  Philippi  to 
Amphipolis  and  Apollonia ;  from  thence  to  Thessalo- 
nica  ;  from  Thessalonica  to  Berea ;  from  Berea  to  Athens  ; 
and  from  Athens  to  Corinth ;  which  tract  confines  him  to 
the  eastern  side  of  the  peninsula,  and  therefore  keeps  him 
all  the  while  at  a  considerable  distance  from  Illyricum. 
Upon  his  second  visit  to  Macedonia,  the  history,  we  have 

2* 


34  THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    ROMANS. 

seen,  leaves  him  at  liberty.  It  must  have  been,  therefore, 
upon  that  second  visit,  if  at  all,  that  he  approached  Illyri- 
cum  ;  and  this  visit,  we  know,  almost  immediately  pre- 
ceded the  writing  of  the  epistle.  It  was  natural  that  the 
apostle  should  refer  to  a  journey  which  was  fresh  in  his 
thoughts. 


No.  V. 

Chap.  xv.  30.  "  Now,  I  beseech  you,  brethren,  for 
the  Lord  Jesus  Christ's  sake,  and  for  the  love  of  the 
Spirit,  that  ye  strive  together  with  me  in  your  prayers  to 
God  for  me,  that  I  may  be  delivered  from  them  that  do 
not  believe,  in  Juda3a.'' — With  this  compare  Acts,  xx. 
22,  23 : 

"  And  now,  behold,  I  go  bound  in  the  spirit  unto  Jeru- 
salem, not  knowing  the  things  that  shall  befall  me  there, 
save  that  the  Holy  Ghost  witnesseth  in  every  city,  saying 
that  bonds  and  afflictions  abide  me." 

Let  it  be  remarked  that  it  is  the  same  journey  to  Je- 
rusalem which  is  spoken  of  in  these  two  passages ;  that 
the  epistle  was  written  immediately  before  St.  Paul  set 
forwards  upon  this  journey  from  Achaia ;  that  the  words 
in  the  Acts  were  uttered  by  him  when  he  had  proceeded 
in  that  journey,  as  far  as  Miletus,  in  Lesser  Asia.  This 
being  remembered,  I  observe  that  the  two  passages,  with- 
out any  resemblance  between  them  that  could  induce  us 
to  suspect  that  they  were  borrowed  from  one  another, 
represent  the  state  of  St.  Paul's  mind,  with  respect  to  the 
event  of  the  journey,  in  terms  of  substantial  agreement. 
They  both  express  his  sense  of  danger  in  the  approach- 
ing visit  to  Jerusalem  :  they  both  express  the  doubt  which 
dwelt  upon  his  thoughts  concerning  what  might  there  be- 


THE    EPI3TLE    TO    i'HE    ROMANS. 


35 


fall  him.     When,  in  his  epistle,  he  entreats  the  Roman 
Christians,  "  for  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ's  sake,  and  for  the 
love  of  the  Spirit,  to  strive  together  with  him  in  their 
prayers  to  God  for  him,  that  he  might  be  delivered  from 
them  which  do  not  believe,  in  Judea,"  he  sufficiently  con- 
fesses his  fears.     In  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  we  see  in 
him  the  same  apprehensions,  and  the  same  uncertainty : 
«  I  go  bound  in  the  spirit  to  Jerusalem,  not  knowing  the 
things  that  shall  befall  me  there."     The  only  difference 
is,  that  in  the  history  his  thoughts  are  more  inclined  to 
despondency  than  in  the  epistle.     In  the  epistle  he  retains 
his  hope  "  that  he  should  come  unto  them  with  joy  by  the 
will  of  God  ;"  in  the  history,  his  mind  yields  to  the  reflec- 
tion, "  that  the  Holy  Ghost  witnesseth  in  every  city  that 
bonds  and  afflictions  awaited  him.''     Now  that  his  fears 
should  be  greater,  and  his  hopes  less,  in  this  stage  of  his 
journey  than  when  he  wrote  his  epistle,  that  is,  when  he 
first  set  out  upon  it,  is  no  other  alteration  than  might  well 
be  expected  ;  since  those  prophetic  intimations  to  which 
he  refers,  when  he  says,  "  the  Holy  Ghost  witnesseth  in 
every  city,"  had  probably  been  received  by  him  in  the 
course  of  his  journey,  and  were  probably  similar  to  what 
we  know  he  received  in  the  remaining  part  of  it  at  Tyre, 
xxi.  4,  and  afterwards  from  Agabus  at  Csesarea,  xxi.  11. 


No.  VI. 

There  is  another  strong  remark  arising  from  the  same 
passage  in  the  epistle;  to  make  which  understood,  it  will 
be  necessary  to  state  the  passage  over  again,  and  some- 
what more  at  length. 

"  I  beseech  you,  brethren,  for  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ's 
sake,  and  for  the  love  of  the  Spirit,  that  ye  strive  together 


30  THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    ROMANS. 

with  me  in  your  prayers  to  God  for  me,  that  I  may  be 
delivered  from  them  that  do  not  believe,  in  Judea — that 
I  may  come  unto  you  with  joy  by  the  will  of  God,  and 
may  with  you  be  refreshed." 

I  desire  the  reader  to  call  to  mind  that  part  of  St.  Paul's 
history  which  took  place  after  his  arrival  at  Jerusalem, 
and  which  employs  the  seven  last  chapters  of  the  Acts : 
and  I  build  upon  it  this  observation — that,  supposing  the 
Epistle  to  the  Romans  to  have  been  a  forgery,  and  the 
author  of  the  forgery  to  have  had  the  Acts  of  the  Apos- 
tles before  him,  and  to  have  there  seen  that  St.  Paul,  in 
fact,  "  was  not  delivered  from  the  unbelieving  Jews,"  but 
on  the  contrary,  that  he  was  taken  into  custody  at  Jeru- 
salem, and  brought  to  Rome  a  prisoner — it  is  next  to  im- 
possible that  he  should  have  made  St.  Paul  express  ex- 
pectations so  contrary  to  what  he  saw  had  been  the  event; 
and  utter  prayers,  with  apparent  hopes  of  success,  which 
be  must  have  known  were  frustrated  in  the  issue. 

This  single  consideration  convinces  me  that  no  concert 
or  confederacy  whatever  subsisted  between  the  epistle 
and  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles;  and  that  whatever  coinci- 
dences have  been  or  can  be  pointed  out  between  them 
are  unsophisticated,  and  are  the  result  of  truth  and 
reality. 

It  also  convinces  me  that  the  epistle  was  written  not 
only  in  St.  Paul's  lifetime,  but  before  he  arrived  at  Jeru- 
salem :  for  the  important  events  relating  to  him  which 
took  place  after  his  arrival  at  that  city  must  have  been 
known  to  the  Christian  community  soon  after  they  hap- 
pened: they  form  the  most  public  part  of  his  history. 
But  had  they  been  known  to  the  author  of  the  epistle — in 
in  other  words  had  they  then  taken  place — the  passage 
which  we  have  quoted  from  the  epistle  would  not  havt 
been  found  there. 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    ROMANS.  37 


No.   VII. 

I  now  proceed  to  stote  the  conformity  which  exists  be- 
tween the  argument  of  this  epistle  and  the  history  of  its 
reputed  author.  It  is  enough  for  this  purpose  to  observe 
that  the  object  of  the  epistle,  that  is,  of  the  argumentative 
part  of  it,  was  to  place  the  Gentile  convert  upon  a  parity 
of  situation  with  the  Jewish,  in  respect  of  his  religious 
condition,  and  his  rank  in  the  Divine  favor.  The  epistle 
supports  this  point  by  a  variety  of  arguments  ;  such  as, 
that  no  man  of  either  description  was  justified  by  the 
works  of  the  law — for  this  plain  reason,  that  no  man  had 
performed  them  ;  that  it  became  therefore  necessary  to 
appoint  another  medium  or  condition  of  justification,  in 
which  new  medium  the  Jewish  peculiarity  was  merged 
and  lost ;  that  Abraham's  own  justification  was  anterior 
to  the  law,  and  independent  of  it ;  that  the  Jewish  con- 
verts were  to  consider  the  law  as  now  dead,  and  them- 
selves as  married  to  another  ;  that  what  the  law  in  truth 
could  not  do,  in  that  it  was  weak  through  the  flesh,  God 
had  done  by  sending  his  Son  ;  that  God  had  rejected  the 
unbelieving  Jews,  and  had  substituted  in  their  place  a 
society  of  believers  in  Christ,  collected  indifferently  from 
Jews  and  Gentiles.  Soon  after  the  writing  of  this  epistle, 
St.  Faul,  agreeably  to  the  intention  intimated  in  the  epis- 
tle itself,  took  his  journey  to  Jerusalem.  The  day  after 
he  arrived  there,  he  was  introduced  to  the  church.  What 
passed  at  this  interview  is  thus  related,  Acts,  xxi.  19: 
""When  he  had  saluted  them,  he  declared  particularly 
what  things  pod  h;id  wrought  among  the  Gentiles  by  his 
ministry  ;  and,  when  they  heard  it,  they  glorified  the 
Lord ;  and  said  unto  him,  Thou  seest,  brother,  how  many 
thousands  of  Jews  there  are  which  believe  ;  and  they  are 


38  THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    ROMANS. 

all  zealous  of  the  law  ;  and  they  are  informed  of  thee, 
that  thou  teachest  all  the  Jews  which  are  among  the  Gen- 
tiles to  forsake  Moses,  saying  that  they  ought  not  to  cir- 
cumcise their  children,  neither  to  walk  after  the  customs." 
St.  Paul  disclaimed  the  charge ;  but  there  must  have  been 
something  to  have  led  to  it.  Now,  it  is  only  to  suppose 
that  St.  Paul  openly  professed  the  principles  which  the 
epistle  contains;  that,  in  the  course  of  his  ministry  he  had 
uttered  the  sentiments  which  he  is  here  made  to  write ; 
and  the  matter  is  accounted  for.  Concerning  the  accu- 
sation which  public  rumor  had  brought  against  him  to 
Jerusalem,  I  will  not  say  that  it  was  just ;  but  I  will  say 
that,  if  he  was  the  author  of  the  epistle  before  us,  and  if 
his  preaching  was  consistent  with  his  writing,  it  was  ex- 
tremely natural :  for  though  it  be  not  a  necessary,  surely 
it  is  an  easy,  inference,  that,  if  the  Gentile  convert,  who 
did  not  observe  the  law  of  Moses,  held  as  advantageous 
a  situation  in  his  religious  interests  as  the  Jewish  convert 
who  did,  there  could  be  no  strong  reason  for  observing 
that  law  at  all.  The  remonstrance,  therefore,  of  the 
church  of  Jerusalem,  and  the  report  which  occasioned  it, 
were  founded  in  no  very  violent  misconstruction  of  the 
apostle's  doctrine.  His  reception  at  Jerusalem  was  ex- 
actly what  I  should  have  expected  the  author  of  this  epis- 
tle to  have  met  with.  I  am  entitled  therefore  to  argue, 
that  a  separate  narrative  of  effects  experienced  by  St. 
Paul,  similar  to  what  a  person  might  be  expected  to  ex- 
perience who  held  the  doctrines  advanced  in  this  epistle, 
forms  a  proof  that  he  did  hold  these  doctrines  ;  and  that 
the  epistle  bearing  his  name,  in  which  such  doctrines  are 
laid  down,  actually  proceeded  from  him. 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    ROMANS.  30 


No.    VIII. 

This  number  is  supplemental  to  the  former.  I  propose 
to  point  out  in  it  two  particulars  in  the  conduct  of  the 
argument,  perfectly  adapted  to  the  historical  circumstan- 
ces under  which  the  epistle  was  written ;  which  yet  are 
free  from  all  appearance  of  contrivance,  and  which  it 
would  not,  I  think,  have  entered  into  the  mind  of  a  soph- 
ist to  contrive. 

1.  The  Epistle  to  the  Galatians  relates  to  the  same 
general  question  as  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans.  St.  Paul 
had  founded  the  church  of  Galatia  :  at  Rome  he  had 
never  been.  Observe  now  a  difference  in  his  manner  of 
treating  of  the  same  subject,  corresponding  with  this  dif- 
ference in  his  situation.  In  the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians 
he  puts  the  point  in  a  great  measure  upon  authority  :  "  I 
marvel  that  ye  are  so  soon  removed  from  him  that  called 
you  into  the  grace  of  Christ,  unto  another  Gospel :" 
Gal.,  i.  G.  "  I  certify  you,  brethren,  that  the  Gospel 
which  was  preached  of  me  is  not  after  man  ;  for  I  neither 
received  it  of  man,  neither  was  I  taught  it  but  by  the 
revelation  of  Jesus  Christ:"  chap.  i.  11,  12.  "I  am 
afraid,  lest  I  have  bestowed  upon  you  labor  in  vain :" 
iv.  11,  12.  "I  desire  to  be  present  with  you  now,  for  I 
stand  in  doubt  of  you :"  iv.  20.  "  Behold,  I,  Paul,  say 
unto  you,  that,  if  ye  be  circumcised,  Christ  shall  profit 
you  nothing:"  v.  2.  "This  persuasion  cometh  not  of 
him  that  called  you :"  v.  8.  This  is  the  style  in  which 
he  accosts  the  Galatians.  In  the  epistle  to  the  converts 
of  Rome,  where  his  authority  was  not  established,  nor 
his  person  known,  he  puts  the  same  points  entirely  upon 
argument.  The  perusal  of  the  epistle  will  prove  this  to 
the  satisfaction  of  every  reader:  and,  as  the  observation 


40  THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    ROMANS. 

relates  to  the  whole  contents  of  the  epistle,  I  forbear  ad- 
ducing separate  extracts.  I  repeat,  therefore,  that  we 
have  pointed  out  a  distinction  in  the  two  epistles,  suited 
to  the  relation  in  which  the  author  stood  to  his  different 
correspondents. 

Another  adaptation,  and  somewhat  of  the  same  kind, 
is  the  following : 

2.  The  Jews,  we  know7,  were  very  numerous  at  Rome, 
and  probably  formed  a  principal  part  amongst  the  new 
converts ;  so  much  so  that  the  Christians  seem  to  have 
been  known  at  Rome  rather  as  a  denomination  of  Jews 
than  as  any  thing  else.  In  an  epistle  consequently  to  the 
Roman  believers,  the  point  to  be  endeavored  after  by  St. 
Paul  was  to  reconcile  the  Jewish  converts  to  the  opinion 
that  the  Gentiles  were  admitted  by  God  to  a  parity  of 
religious  situation  with  themselves,  and  that  without  their 
being  bound  by  the  law  of  Moses.  The  Gentile  con- 
verts would  probably  accede  to  this  opinion  very  readily. 
In  this  epistle,  therefore,  though  directed  to  the  Roman 
Church  in  general,  it  is  in  truth  a  Jew  writing  to  Jews. 
Accordingly  you  will  take  notice  that,  as  often  as  the 
argument  leads  him  to  say  any  thing  derogatory  from 
the  Jewish  institution,  he  constantly  follows  it  by  a  soft- 
ening clause.  Having  (ii.  28,  29,)  pronounced,  not  much 
perhaps  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  native  Jews,  "  that  he 
is  not  a  Jew  which  is  one  outwardly,  neither  that  cir- 
cumcision which  is  outward  in  the  flesh;"  he  adds  im- 
mediately, "  What  advantantage  then  hath  the  Jew,  or 
what,  profit  is  there  in  circumcision  ?  Much,  every  ivay." 
Having  in  the  third  chapter,  ver.  28,  brought  his  argu- 
ment to  this  formal  conclusion,  "  that  a  man  is  justified 
by  faith  without  the  deeds  of  the  law,"  he  presently  sub- 
joins, ver.  31,  "Do  we  then  make  void  the  law  through 
faith?     God  forbid  !     Yea,  we  establish  the  law"     In  the 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    ROMANS.  41 

seventh  chapter,  when  in  the  sixth  verse  he  had  advanced 
the  bold  assertion  "  that  now  we  are  delivered  from  the 
law,  that  being  dead  wherein  we  were  held  ;"  in  the  very- 
next  verse  he  comes  in  with  this  healing  question,  "What 
shall  we  say  then  ?     Is  the  law  sin  ?     God  forbid  !     Nay, 
I  had  not  known  sin  but  by  the  law."     Having  in  the 
following  words  insinuated,  or  rather  more  than  insin- 
uated, the  inefficacy  of  the  Jewish  law,  viii.  3,  "  for  what 
the  law  could  not  do,  in  that  it  was  weak  through  the 
flesh,  God  sending  his  own  Son  in  the  likeness  of  sin- 
ful flesh,  and  for  sin,  condemned  sin  in  the  flesh  ;"  after  a 
digression  indeed,  but  that  sort  of  a  digression  which  he 
could  never  resist,  a  rapturous  contemplation  of  his  Chris- 
tian hope,  and  which  occupies  the  latter  part  of  this  chap- 
ter ;  we  find  him  in  the  next,  as  if  sensible  that  he  had 
said  something  which  would  give  offence,  returning  to 
his  Jewish  brethren  in  terms  of  the  warmest  affection 
and  respect.    "  I  say  the  truth  in  Christ  Jesus  ;  I  lie  not ; 
my  conscience  also1   bearing   me  witness   in   the  Holy 
Ghost,  that  I  have  great  heaviness  and  continual  sorrow 
in  my  heart ;  for  I  could  wish  that  myself  were  accursed 
from  Christ,  for  my  brethren,  my  kinsmen  according  to 
ihejlesfi,  who  are  Israelites.,  to  whom  pertaineth  the  adop- 
tion, and  the  glory,  and  the  covenants,  and  the  giving  of 
the  law,  and  the  service  of  God,  and  the  pro?nises  ;  whose 
are  the  fathers ;  and  of  idiom,  as   concerning  the  flesh, 
Christ  came"    When,  in  the  thirty-first  and  thirty-second 
verses  of  this  ninth  chapter,  he  represented  to  the  Jews 
the  error  of  even  the  best  of  their  nation,  by  telling  them 
that"  Israel,  which  followed  after  the  law  of  righteous- 
ness, had   not  attained  to  the  law  of  righteousness,  be- 
cause they  sought  it  not  by  faith,  but  as  it  were  by  the 
works  of  the  law,  for  they  stumbled  at  that  stumbling- 
stone,"  he  takes  care  to  annex  to  this  declaration  these 


42  THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    ROMANS. 

conciliating  expressions  :  "  Brethren,  my  heart's  desire 
and  prayer  to  God  for  Israel  is,  that  they  might  be  saved  ; 
for  I  bear  them  record  that  they  have  a  zeal  of  God,  but 
not  according  to  knowledge."  Lastly,  having,  chap.  x. 
20,  2,1,  by  the  application  of  a  passage  in  Isaiah,  insin- 
uated the  most  ungrateful  of  all  propositions  to  a  Jewish 
ear,  the  rejection  of  the  Jewish  nation  as  God's  peculiar 
people  ;  he  hastens,  as  it  were,  to  qualify  the  intelligence 
of  their  fall  by  this  interesting  expostulation  :  "  I  say,  then, 
hath  God  cast  away  his  people  (i.  e.  wholly  and  entirely)  ? 
God  forbid !  for  I  also  am  an  Israelite,  of  the  seed  of 
Abraham,  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin.  God  hath  not  cast 
away  his  people  which  he  foreknew  ,-"  and  follows  this 
thought,  throughout  the  whole  of  the  eleventh  chapter, 
in  a  series  of  reflections  calculated  to  soothe  the  Jewish 
converts,  as  well  as  to  procure  from  their  Gentile  breth- 
ren respect  to  the  Jewish  institution.  Now  all  this  is 
perfectly  natural.  In  a  real  St.  Paul  writing  to  real 
converts,  it  is  what  anxiety  to  bring  them  over  to  his 
persuasion  would  naturally  produce ;  but  there  is  an 
earnestness  and  a  personality,  if  I  may  so  call  it,  in  the 
manner,  which  a  cold  forgery,  I  apprehend,  would  neither 
have  conceived  nor  supported. 


CHAPTER  III. 

THE  FIRST  EPISTLE  TO  THE  CORINTHIANS. 

No.   I. 

Before  we  proceed  to  compare  this  epistle  with  the 
history,  or  with  any  other  epistle,  we  will  employ  one 
number  in  stating  certain  remarks  applicable  to  our  ar- 
gument, which  arise  from  a  perusal  of  the  epistle  itself. 

By  an  expression  in  the  first  verse  of  the  seventh  chap- 
ter, "now  concerning  the  things  whereof  ye  wrote  unto 
me,"  it  appears  that  this  letter  to  the  Corinthians  was 
written  by  St.  Paul  in  answer  to  one  which  he  had  re- 
ceived from  them ;  and  that  the  seventh,  and  some  of 
the  following  chapters,  are  taken  up  in  resolving  certain 
doubts,  and  regulating  certain  points  of  order,  concern- 
ing which  the  Corinthians  had  in  their  letter  consulted 
him.  This  alone  is  a  circumstance  considerably  in  favor 
of  the  authenticity  of  the  epistle  :  for  it  must  have  been  a 
far-fetched  contrivance  in  a  forgery,  first  to  have  feigned 
the  receipt  of  a  letter  from  the  church  of  Corinth,  which 
letter  does  not  appear;  and  then  to  have  drawn  up  a  fic- 
titious answer  to  it,  relative  to  a  great  variety  of  doubts 
and  inquiries,  purely  economical  and  domestic  ;  and  which, 
though  likely  enough  to  have  occurred  to  an  infant  so- 
ciety, in  a  situation  and  under  an  institution  so  novel  as 
that  of  a  Christian  church  then  was,  it  must  have  very 
much  exercised  the  author's  invention,  and  could  have 
answered  no  imaginable  purpose  of  forgery,  to  introduce 


44  THE    FIRST    EPrSTLE    TO    THE    CORINTHIANS. 

the  mention  of  at  all.  Particulars  of  the  kind  we  refer 
to  are  such  as  the  following :  The  rule  of  duty  and  pru- 
dence relative  to  entering  into  marriage,  as  applicable  to 
virgins,  to  widows ;  the  case  of  husbands  married  to  un- 
converted wives  and  wives  having  unconverted  hus- 
bands ;  that  case  where  the  unconverted  party  chooses  to 
separate,  where  he  chooses  to  continue  the  union ;  the  ef- 
fect which  their  conversion  produced  upon  their  prior 
^tate,  of  circumcision,  of  slavery  ;  the  eating  of  things  of- 
fered to  idols,  as  it  was  in  itself,  as  others  were  affected 
by  it ;  the  joining  in  idolatrous  sacrifices ;  the  decorum  to 
be  observed  in  their  religious  assemblies,  the  order  of 
speaking,  the  silence  of  women,  the  covering  or  uncover- 
ing of  the  head,  as  it  became  men,  as  it  became  women. 
These  subjects,  with  their  several  subdivisions,  are  so 
particular,  minute,  and  numerous,  that,  though  they  be 
exactly  agreeable  to  the  circumstances  of  the  persons  to 
whom  the  letter  was  written,  nothing,  I  believe,  but  the 
existence  and  reality  of  those  circumstances  could  have 
suggested  to  the  writer's  thoughts. 

But  this  is  riot  the  only  nor  the  principal  observation 
upon  the  correspondence  between  the  church  of  Corinth 
and  their  apostle,  which  I  wish  to  point  out.  It  appears, 
I  think,  in  this  correspondence,  that,  although  the  Co- 
rinthians had  written  to  St.  Paul,  requesting  his  answer 
and  his  directions  in  the  several  points  above  enumer- 
ated, yet  that  they  had  not  said  one  syllable  about  the 
enormities  and  disorders  which  had  crept  in  amongst 
them,  and  in  the  blame  of  which  they  all  shared  ;  but  that 
St.  Paul's  information  concerning  the  irregularities  then 
prevailing  at  Corinth  had  come  round  to  him  from  other 
quarters.  The  quarrels  and  disputes  excited  by  their 
contentious  adherence  to  their  different  teachers,  and  by 
their  placing  of  them  in  competition  with  one  another, 


THE    FIRST    EPISTLE    TO    THE    CORINTHIANS.  45 

were  not  mentioned  in  their  letter,  but  communicated  to 
St.  Paul  by  more  private  intelligence:  "It  hath  been  de- 
clared unto  me,  my  brethren,  by  them  which  are  of  the 
house  of  Chloe,  that  there  are  contentions  among  you. 
Now  this  I  say,lhat  every  one  of  you  saith,  I  am  of  Paul, 
and  I  of  Apollos,  and  I  of  Cephas,  and  I  of  Christ:"  i.  11, 
12.  The  incestuous  marriage  "  of  a  man  with  his  father's 
wife,"  which  St.  Paul  reprehends  with  so  much  severity 
in  the  fifth  chapter  of  our  epistle,  and  which  was  not  the 
crime  of  an  individual  only,  but  a  crime  in  which  the 
whole  church,  by  tolerating  and  conniving  at  it,  had  ren- 
dered themselves  partakers,  did  not  come  to  St.  Paul's 
knowledge  by  the  fetter,  but  by  a  rumor  which  had 
reached  his  ears:  "It  is  reported  commonly  that  there  is 
fornication  among  you,  and  such  fornication  as  is  not  so 
much  as  named  among  the  Gentiles,  that  one  should  have 
his  father's  wife ;  and  ye  are  puffed  up,  and  have  not 
rather  mourned  that  he  that  hath  done  this  deed  might 
be  taken  away  from  among  you:"  v.  1,  2.  Their  going 
to  law  before  the  judicature  of  the  country,  rather  than 
arbitrate  and  adjust  their  disputes  among  themselves, 
which  St.  Paul  animadverts  upon  with  his  usual  plainness, 
was  not  intimated  to  him  in  the  letter,  because  he  tells 
them  his  opinion  of  this  conduct  before  he  comes  to  the 
contents  of  the  letter.  Their  litigiousness  is  censured  by 
St.  Paul  in  the  sixth  chapter  of  his  epistle,  and  it  is  only 
at  the  beginning  of  the  seventh  chapter  that  he  proceeds 
upon  the  articles  which  he  found  in  their  letter ;  and  he 
proceeds  upon  them  with  this  preface :  "  Now  concern- 
ing the  things  whereof  ye  wrote  unto  me,"  vii.  1  ;  which 
introduction  he  would  not  have  used  if  he  had  been  al- 
ready discussing  any  of  the  subjects  concerning  which 
they  had  written.  Their  irregularities  in  celebrating  the 
Lord's  supper,  and  the  utter  perversion  of  the  institution 


46  THE    FIRST    EPISTLE    TO    THE    CORINTHIANS. 

which  ensued,  were  not  in  the  letter,  as  is  evident  from 
the  terms  in  which  St.  Paul  mentions  the  notice  he  had 
received  of  it :  "  Now  in  this  that  I  declare  unto  you,  I 
praise  you  not,  that  ye  come  together  not  for  the  better, 
but  for  the  worse  ;  for,  first  of  all,  when  ye  come  together 
in  the  church,  /  hear  there  be  dividings  among  you,  and 
I  partly  believe  it."  Now,  that  the  Corinthians  should,  in 
their  own  letter,  exhibit  the  fair  side  of  their  conduct  to 
the  apostle,  and  conceal  from  him  the  faults  of  their  be- 
havior, was  extremely  natural,  and  extremely  probable: 
but  it  was  a  distinction  which  would  not,  I  think,  have 
easily  occurred  to  the  author  of  a  forgery  ;  and  much  less 
likely  is  it  that  it  should  have  entered  into  his  thoughts 
to  make  the  distinction  appear  in  the  way  in  which  it 
does  appear,  viz.  not  by  the  original  letter,  not  by  an 
express  observation  upon  it  in  the  answer,  but  distantly 
by  marks  perceivable  in  the  manner,  or  in  the  order,  in 
which  St.  Paul  takes  notice  of  their  faults. 


No.  II. 

Our  epistle  purports  to  have  been  written  after  St. 
Paul  had  already  been  at  Corinth :  "  I,  brethren,  when  I 
came  unto  you,  came  not  with  excellency  of  speech  or  of 
wisdom,"  ii.  1  ;  and  in  many  other  places  to  the  same  ef- 
fect. It  purports  also  to  have  been  written  upon  the  eve 
of  another  visit  to  that  church :  "  I  will  come  to  you 
shortly,  if  the  Lord  will,"  iv.  19 ;  and  again,  I  "  will  come 
to  you  when  I  shall  pass  through  Macedonia,"  xvi.  5. 

Now  the  history  relates  that  St.  Paul  did  in  fact  visit 
Corinth  twice:  once  as  recorded  at  length  in  the  eigh- 
teenth, and  a  second  time  as  mentioned  briefly  in  the 
twentieth  chapter  of  the  Acts.     The  same  history  also 


THE    FIRST    EriSTLE    TO    THE    CORINTHIANS.  47 

informs  us,  Acts  xx.  1,  that  it  was  from  Ephesus  St.  Paul 
proceeded  upon  his  second  journey  into  Greece.  There- 
fore, as  the  epistle  purports  to  have  been  written  a  short 
time  preceding  that  journey  ;  and  as  St.  Paul,  the  history 
tells  us,  had  resided  more  than  two  years  at  Ephesus, 
before  he  set  out  upon  it,  it  follows  that  it  must  have 
been  from  Ephesus,  to  be  consistent  with  the  history,  that 
the  epistle  was  written  ;  and  every  note  of  place  in  the 
epistle  agrees  with  this  supposition.  "  If,  after  the  man- 
ner of  men,  I  have  fought  with  beasts  at  Ephesus,  what 
advantageth  it  me,  if  the  dead  rise  not?"xv.  32.  I  allow 
that  the  apostle  might  say  this,  wherever  he  was ;  but  it 
was  more  natural  and  more  to  the  purpose  to  say  it,  if  he 
was  at  Ephesus  at  the  time,  and  in  the  midst  of  those 
conflicts  to  which  the  expression  relates.  "The  churches 
of  Asia  salute  you,"  xvi.  10.  Asia,  throughout  the  Acts 
of  the  Apostles  and  the  epistles  of  St.  Paul,  does  not 
mean  the  whole  of  Asia  Minor  or  Antolia,  nor  even  the 
whole  of  the  proconsular  Asia,  but  a  district  in  the  ante- 
rior part  of  that  country,  called  Lydian  Asia,  divided  from 
the  rest,  much  as  Portugal  is  from  Spain,  and  of  which 
district  Ephesus  was  the  capital.  "Aquilaand  Priscilla 
salute  you:"  xvi.  19.  Aquila  and  Priscilla  were  at 
Ephesus  during  the  period  within  which  this  epistle  was 
written:  Acts,  xviii.  18,  26.  "I  will  tarry  at  Ephesus 
until  Pentecost :"  xvi.  8.  This,  I  apprehend,  is  in  terms 
almost  asserting  that  he  was  at  Ephesus  at  the  time  of 
writing  the  epistle. — "A  great  and  effectual  door  is 
opened  unto  me :"  xvi.  9.  How  well  this  declaration 
corresponded  with  the  state  of  things  at  Ephesus,  and  the 
progress  of  the  Gospel  in  these  parts,  we  learn  from  the 
reflection  with  which  the  historian  concludes  the  account 
of  certain  transactions  which  passed  there  :  "  So  mightily 
grew  the  word  of  God  and  prevailed,"  Acts,  xix.  20  ;  a«' 


48  THE    FIRST    EriSTLE    TO    THE    CORINTHIANS. 

well  ns  from  the  complaint  of  Demetrius,  "that  not  only 
at  Ephesus,  but  also  throughout  all  Asia,  this  Paul  hath 
persuaded  and  turned  away  much  people :"  xix.  26. — 
"And  there  are  many  adversaries,"  says  the  epistle.,  xvi.  9. 
Look  into  the  history  of  this  period  :  "  When  divers  were 
hardened  and  believed  not,  but  spake  evil  of  that  way 
before  the  multitude,  he  departed  from  them,  and  sepa- 
rated the  disciples."  The  conformity  therefore,  upon  this 
head  of  comparison,  is  circumstantial  and  perfect.  If 
any  one  think  that  this  is  a  conformity  so  obvious  that 
any  forger  of  tolerable  caution  and  sagacity  would  have 
taken  care  to  preserve  it,  I  must  desire  such  a  one  to 
read  the  epistle  for  himself;  and,  when  he  has  done  so, 
to  declare  whether  he  has  discovered  one  mark  of  art  or 
design ;  whether  the  notes  of  time  and  place  appear  to 
him  to  be  inserted  with  any  reference  to  each  other,  with 
any  view  of  their  being  compared  with  each  other,  or  for 
the  purpose  of  establishing  a  visible  agreement  with  the 
history,  in  respect  of  them. 


No.   III. 

Chap.  iv.  17 — 19.  "  For  this  cause  I  have  sent  unto 
yo.u  Timotheus,  who  is  my  beloved  son,  and  faithful  in 
the  Lord,  who  shall  bring  you  into  remembrance  of  my 
ways  which  be  in  Christ,  as  I  teach  everywhere  in  every 
church.  Now  some  are  puffed  up,  as  though  I  would  not 
come  unto  you  ;  but  I  will  come  unto  you  shortly,  if  the 
Lord  will." 

With  this  I  compare  Acts,  xix.  21,  22:  "After  these 
things  were  ended,  Paul  purposed  in  the  spirit,  when 
he  had  passed  through  Macedonia  and  Achaia,  to  go  to 
Jerusalem  ;  saying,  After  I  have  been  there,  I  must  also 


\ 

THE    FIRST    EFISTLE    TO    THE    CORINTHIANS.  49 

see  Rome  ;  so  he  sent  unto  Macedonia  two  of  them  that 
ministered  unto  him,  Timotheus  and  Erastus." 

Though  it  be  not  said,  it  appears,  I  think,  with  sufE-  • 
cient  certainty,  I  mean  from  the  history,  independently  of 
the  epistle,  that  Timothy  was  sent  upon  this  occasion  into 
Achaia,  of  which  Corinth  was  the  capital  city,  as  well  as 
into  Macedonia :  for  the  sending  of  Timothy  and  Erastus 
is,  in  the  passage  where  it  is  mentioned,  plainly  connected 
with  St.  Paul's  own  journey :  he  sent  them  before  him. 
As  he  therefore  purposed  to  go  into  Achaia  himself,  it  is 
highly  probable  that  they  were  to  go  thither  also.  Nev- 
ertheless, they  are  said  only  to  have  been  sent  into  Mace- 
donia, because  Macedonia  was  in  truth  the  country  to 
which  they  went  immediately  from  Ephesus  ;  being 
directed,  as  we  suppose,  to  proceed  afterwards  from 
thence  into  Achaia.  If  this  be  so,  the  narrative  agrees 
with  the  epistle  :  and  the  agreement  is  attended  with 
very  little  appearance  of  design.  One  thing  at  least  con- 
cerning it  is  certain :  that,  if  this  passage  'of  St.  Paul's 
history  had  been  taken  from  his  letter,  it  would  have  sent 
Timothy  to  Corinth  by  name,  or  expressly,  however,  into 
Achaia. 

■  But  there  is  another  circumstance  in  these  two  pas- 
sages much  less  obvious,  in  which  an  agreement  holds 
without  any  room  for  suspicion  that  it  was  produced  by 
design.  We  have  observed  that  the  sending  of  Timothy 
into  the  peninsula  of  Greece  was  connected  in  the  narra- 
tive with  St.  Paul's  own  journey  thither ;  it  is  stated  as 
the  effect  of  the  same  resolution.  Paul  purposed  to  go 
into  Macedonia ;  "  so  he  sent  two  of  them  that  ministered 
unto  him,  Timotheus  and  Erastus."  Now  in  the  epistle 
also  you  remark  that,  when  the  apostle  mentions  his  hav- 
ing sent  Timothy  unto  them,  in  the  very  next  sentence  he 
speaks  of  his  own  visit :  "  for  this  cause  have  I  sent  unto 

3 


50  THE    FIRST    EPISTLE    TO    THE    CORINTHIANS. 

you  Timotheus,  who  is  my  beloved  son,"  &c.  "  Now 
some  are  puffed  up,  as  though  I  would  not  come  to  you ; 
but  I  will  come  to  you  shortly,  if  God  will."  Timothy's 
journey,  we  see,  is  mentioned  in  the  history,  and  in  the 
epistle,  in  close  connection  with  St.  Paul's  own.  Here  is 
the  same  order  of  thought  and  intention  ;  yet  conveyed 
under  such  diversity  of  circumstance  and  expression,  and 
the  mention  of  them  in  the  epistle  so  allied  to  the  occa- 
sion which  introduces  it,  viz.  the  insinuation  of  his  adver- 
saries that  he  would  come  to  Corinth  no  more,  that  I  am 
persuaded  no  attentive  reader  will  believe  that  these  pas- 
sages were  written  in  concert  with  one  another,  or  will 
doubt  but  that  the  agreement  is  unsought  and  uncon- 
trived. 

But,  in  the  Acts,  Erastus  accompanied  Timothy  in  this 
journey,  of  whom  no  mention  is  made  in  the  epistle. 
From  what  has  been  said  in  our  observations  upon  the 
Epistle  to  the  Romans,  it  appears  probable  that  Erastus 
was  a  Corinthian.  If  so,  though  he  accompanied  Timo- 
thy to  Corinth,  he  was  only  returning  home,  and  Timothy 
was  the  messenger  charged  with  St.  Paul's  orders. — At 
any  rate,  this  discrepancy  shows  that  the  passages  were 
not  taken  from  one  another. 


No.  IV. 

Chap.  xvi.  10,  11.  "Now,  if  Timotheus  come,  see  that 
he  may  be  with  you  without  fear;  for  he  workcth  the 
work  of  the  Lord,  as  also  I  do:  let  no  man  therefore  de- 
spise him,  but  conduct  him  forth  in  peace,  that  he  may 
come  unto  me,  for  I  look  for  him  with  the  brethren." 

From  the  passage  considered  in  the  preceding  number, 
it  appears  that  Timothy  was  sent  to  Corinth,  either  with 


THE    FIRST    EPISTLE    TO    THE    CORINTHIANS.  51 

the  epistle,  or  before  it :  "  for  this  cause  have  I  sent  unto 
you  Timotheus."     From  the  passage  now  quoted  we  in- 
fer that  Timothy  was  not  sent  with  the  epistle  ;  for  had  ■ 
he  been  the  bearer  of  the  letter,  or  accompanied  it,  would 
St.  Paul  in  that  letter  have  said,  "  If  Timothy  come  ?" 
Nor  is  the  sequel  consistent  with  the  supposition  of  his 
carrying  the  letter  ;  for,  if  Timothy  was  with  the  apostle 
when  he  wrote  the  letter,  could  he  say,  as  he  does,  "  I 
look  for  him  with  the  brethren?"     I  conclude,  therefore, 
that  Timothy  had  left  St.  Paul  to  proceed  upon  his  journey 
before  the  letter  was  written.     Farther,  the  passage  be- 
fore us  seems  to  imply  that  Timothy  was  not  expected 
by  St.  Paul  to  arrive  at  Corinth  till  after  they  had  re- 
ceived the  letter.     He  gives  them  directions  in  the  letter 
how  to  treat  him  when  he  should  arrive  :  "  If  he  come," 
act  towards  him  so  and  so.     Lastly,  the  whole  form  of 
expression  is  most  naturally  applicable  to  the  supposition 
of  Timothy's  coming  to  Corinth,  not  directly  from  St. 
Paul,  but  from  some  other  quarter ;  and  that  his  instruc- 
tions had  been,  when  he  should  reach  Corinth,  to  return. 
Now,  how  stands  this  matter  in  the  history?     Turn  to 
the  nineteenth  chapter  and  twenty-first  verse  of  the  Acts, 
and  you  will  find  that  Timothy  did  not,  when  sent  from 
Ephesus,  where  he  left  St.  Paul,  and  where  the  present 
epistle  was  written,  proceed  by  a  straight  course  to  Cor- 
inth, but  that  he  went  round  through  Macedonia.     This 
clears  up  every  thing ;  for,  although  Timothy  was  sent 
forth  upon  his  journey  before  the  letter  was  written,  yet 
he  might  not  reach  Corinth  till  after  the  letter  arrived 
there;  and  he  would   come   to   Corinth,  when   he  did 
come,  not  directly  from  St.  Paul  at  Ephesus,  but  from 
some   part   of  Macedonia.      Here,   therefore,  is   a   cir- 
cumstantial and  critical  agreement,  and  unquestionably 
without  design ;  for  neither  of  the  two  passages  in  the- 


52  THE    FIRST    EPISTLE    TO    THE    CORINTHIANS. 

epistle  mentions  Timothy's  journey  into  Macedonia  at  all, 
though  nothing  but  a  circuit  of  that  kind  can  explain  and 
reconcile  the  expressions  which  the  writer  uses. 


No.  V, 

"Chap.  i.  12.  *  Now  this  I  say,  that  every  one  of  you 
saith,  I  am  of  Paul,  and  I  of  Apollos,  and  I  of  Cephas, 
and  I  of  Christ." 

Also,  iii.  6.  "  I  have  planted,  Apollos  watered,  but 
God  gave  the  increase." 

This  expression,  "  I  have  planted,  Apollos  watered," 
imports  two  things  ;  first,  that  Paul  had  been  at  Corinth 
before  Apollos  ;  secondly,  that  Apollos  had  been  at  Corinth 
after  Paul,  but  before  the  writing  of  this  epistle.  This 
implied  account  of  the  several  events,  and  of  the  order  in 
which  they  took  place,  corresponds  exactly  with  the  his- 
tory. St.  Paul,  after  his  first  visit  into  Greece,  returned 
from  Corinth  into  Syria  by  the  way  of  Ephesus  ;  and, 
dropping  his  companions,  Aquila  and  Priscilla,  at  Ephe- 
sus, he  proceeded  forwards  to  Jerusalem ;  from  Jerusa- 
lem he  descended  to  Antioch ;  and  from  thence  made  a 
progress  through  some  of  the  upper  or  northern  provinces 
of  the  Lesser  Asia,  Acts,  xviii.  19,  23  :  during  which  prog- 
ress, and  consequently  in  the  interval  between  St.  Paul's 
first  and  second  visit  to  Corinth,  and  consequently  also 
before  the  writing  of  this  epistle,  which  was  at  Ephesus 
two  years  at  least  after  the  apostle's  return  from  his  prog- 
ress, we  hear  of  Apollos,  and  we  hear  of  him  at  Corinth. 
Whilst  St.  Taul  was  engaged,  as  hath  been  said,  in  Phry- 
gia  and  Galatia,  Apollos  came  down  to  Ephesus ;  and  be- 
ing, in  St.  Paul's  absence,  instructed  by  Aquila  and  Pris- 
cilla, and  having  obtained  letters  of  recommendation  from 


THE    FIRST    EPISTLE    TO    THE    CORINTHIANS.  53 

the  church  of  Ephesus,  he  passed  over  to  Achaia ;  and, 
when  lie  was  there,  we  read  that  he  "helped  them  much 
which  had  believed  through  grace,  for  he  mightily  con- 
vinced the  Jews,  and  that  publicly :"  Acts,  xviii.  27,  28. 
To  have  brought  Apollos  into  Achaia,  of  which  Corinth 
was  the  capital  city,  as  well  as  the  principal  Chris- 
tian church;  and  to  have  shown  that  he  preached  the 
Gospel  in  that  country,  would  have. been  sufficient  for 
our  purpose.  But  the  history  happens  also  to  mention 
Corinth  by  name,  as  the  place  in  which  Apollos,  after 
his  arrival  in  Achaia,  fixed  his  residence :  for,  proceeding 
with  the  account  of  St.  Paul's  travels,  it  tells  us  that, 
while  Apollos  was  at  Corinth,  Paul,  having  passed 
through  the  upper  coasts,  came  down  to  Ephesus,  xix.  1. 
What  is  said,  therefore,  of  Apollos  in  the  epistle,  coincides 
exactly,  and  especially  in  the  point  of  chronology,  with 
what  is  delivered  concerning  him  in  the  history.  The 
only  question  now  is,  Whether  the  allusions  were  made 
with  a  regard  to  this  coincidence  ?  Now,  the  occasions 
and  purposes  for  which  the  name  of  Apollos  is  introduced 
in  the  Acts  and  in  the  epistles  are  so  independent,  and  so 
remote,  that  it  is  impossible  to  discover  the  smallest  refer- 
ence from  one  to  the  other.  Apollos  is  mentioned  in  the 
Acts,  in  immediate  connection  with  the  history  of  Aquila 
and  Priscilla,  and  for  the  very  singular  circumstance  of 
his  "knowing  only  the  baptism  of  John.'"'  In  the  epistle, 
where  none  of  these  circumstances  are  taken  notice  of, 
his  name  first  occurs,  for  the  purpose  of  reproving  the 
contentious  spirit  of  the  Corinthians;  and  it  occurs  only 
in  conjunction  with  that  of  some  others:  ''Every  one  of 
you  saith,  I  am  of  Paul,  and  I  of  Apollos,  and  I  of  Cephas, 
and  I  of  Christ."  The  second  passage  in  which  Apollos 
appears,  "I  have  planted,  Apollos  watered,"  fixes,  as  we 
have  observed,  the  order  of  time  amongst  three  distinct 


54  THE    FIRST    EPISTLE    TO    THE    CORINTHIANS. 

events :  but  it  fixes  this,  I  will  venture  to  pronounce,  with- 
out the  writer  perceiving  that  he  was  doing  any  such 
thing.  The  sentence  fixes  this  order  in  exact  conformity 
with  the  history :  but  it  is  itself  introduced  solely  for  the 
sake  of  the  reflection  which  follows  : — "  Neither  is  he  that 
planteth  any  thing,  neither  he  that  watereth,  but  God, 
that  giveth  the  increase." 


No.  VI. 

Chap.  iv.  11,  12.  "Even  unto  this  present  hour  we 
both  hunger  and  thirst,  and  are  naked,  and  are  buffeted, 
and  have  no  certain  dwelling-place ;  and  labor,  working 
with  our  own  hands." 

We  are  expressly  told,  in  the  history,  that  at  Corinth 
St.  Paul  labored  with  his  own  hands :  "  He  found  Aquila 
and  Priscilla ;  and,  because  he  was  of  the  same  craft,  he 
abode  with  them,  and  wrought :  for  by  their  occupation 
they  were  tent-makers."  But,  in  the  text  before  us,  he  is 
made  to  say,  that  "  he  labored  even  unto  the  present  hour" 
that  is  to  the  time  of  writing  the  epistle  at  Ephesus. 
Now,  in  the  narration  of  St.  Paul's  transactions  at  Ephe- 
sus, delivered  in  the  nineteenth  chapter  of  the  Acts,  noth- 
ing is  said  of  his  working  with  his  own  hands  ;  but  in  the . 
twentieth  chapter  we  read  that  upon  his  return  from 
Greece,  he  sent  for  the  elders  of  the  church  of  Ephesus, 
to  meet  him  at  Miletus ;  and  in  the  discourse  which  he 
there  addressed  to  them,  amidst  some  other  reflections 
which  he  calls  to  their  remembrance,  we  find  the  follow- 
ing :  "I  have  coveted  no  man's  silver,  or  gold,  or  apparel ; 
yea,  ye  yourselves  also  know  that  these  hands  have  min- 
istered unto  my  necessities,  and  to  them  that  were  with 
me."     The  reader  will  not  forget  to  remark  that,  though 


THE    FIRST    EPISTLE    TO    THE    CORINTHIANS.  55 

St.   Paul  be  now  at  Miletus,  it  is  to  the  elders  of  the 
church  of  Ephesus  he  his  speaking,  when  he  savs,     Ye 
yourselves  know  that  these  hands  have  ministered  unto 
my  necessities ;"  and  that  the  whole  discourse  relates  to 
his  conduct  during  his  last  preceding  residence  at  Ephe- 
sus.    That  manual  labor,  therefore,  which  he  had  exer- 
cised at  Corinth,  he  continued  at  Ephesus,  and  not  only 
so,  but  continued  it  during  that  particular  residence  at 
Ephesus,  near  the  conclusion  of  which  this  epistle  was 
written ;  so  that  he  might  with  the  strictest  truth  say  at 
the  time  of  writing  the  epistle,  "  Even  unto  this  present 
hour  we  labor,  working  with  our  own  hands."     The  cor- 
respondency is  sufficient,  then,  as  to  the  undesignedness 
of  it.     It  is  manifest,  to  my  judgment,  that,  if  the  history, 
in  this  article,  had  been  taken  from  the  epistle,  this  cir- 
cumstance, if  it  appeared  at  all,  would  have  appeared 
in  its  place,  that  is,  in  the  direct  account  of  St.   Paul's 
transactions  at  Ephesus.     The  correspondency  would  not 
have  been  effected,  as  it  is,  by  a  kind  of  reflected  stroke, 
that  is,  by  a  reference  in  a  subsequent  speech,  to  what  in 
the  narrative  was  omitted.     Nor  is  it  likely,  on  the  other 
hand,  that  a  circumstance  which  is  not  extant  in  the  his- 
tory of  St.  Paul  at  Ephesus  should  have  been  made  the 
subject  of  a  factitious  allusion,  in  an  epistle  purporting  to 
be  written  by  him  from  that  place ;  not  to  mention  that 
the  allusion  itself,  especially  as  to  time,  is  too  oblique  and 
general  to  answer  any  purpose  of  forgery  whatever. 


No.   VII. 

Chap.  ix.  20.  "  And  unto  the  Jews  I  became  as  a  Jew. 
that  I  might  gain  the  Jews;  to  them  that  are  under  the 
law,  as  under  the  law." 


56  THE    FIRST    EPISTLE    TO    THE    CORINTHIANS. 

We  have  the  disposition  here  described  exemplified  in 
two  instances  which  the  history  records  ;  one,  Acts,  xvi. 
3 :  "  Him  (Timothy)  would  Paul  have  to  go  forth  with 
him,  and  took  and  circumcised  him,  because  of  the  Jews 
in  those  quarters ;  for  they  knew  all  that  his  father  was 
a  Greek."  This  was  before  the  writing  of  the  epistle. 
The  other,  Acts,  xxi.  23,  26,  and  after  the  writing  of  the 
epistle  :  "  Do  this  that  we  say  to  thee  :  we  have  four 
men  which  have  a  vow  on  them  ;  them  take,  and  purify 
thyself  with  them,  that  they  may  shave  their  heads;  and 
all  may  know  that  those  things,  whereof  they  were  in- 
formed concerning  thee,  are  nothing  ;  but  that  thou  thy- 
self also  walkest  orderly,  and  keepest  the  law. — Then  Paul 
took  the  men,  and  the  next  day,  purifying  himself  with 
them,  entered  into  the  temple."  Nor  does  this  concurrence 
between  the  character  and  the  instances  look  like  the  re- 
sult of  contrivance.  St.  Paul,  in  the  epistle,  describes,  or 
is  made  to  describe,  his  own  accommodating  conduct  to- 
wards Jews  and  towards  Gentiles,  towards  the  weak  and 
over-scrupulous,  towards  men  indeed  of  every  variety  of 
character :  "  to  them  that  are  without  law  as  without 
law,  being  not  without  law  to  God,  but  under  the  law  to 
Christ,  that  I  might  gain  them  that  are  without  law ;  to 
the  weak  became  I  as  weak,  that  I  might  gain  the  weak ; 
J  am  made  all  things  to  all  men,  that  I  might  gain  some." 
This  is  the  sequel  of  the  text  which  stands  at  the  head 
of  the  present  number.  Talcing  therefore  the  whole  pas- 
sage together,  the' apostle's  condescension  to  the  Jews  is 
mentioned  only  as  a  part  of  his  general  disposition  to- 
wards all.  It  is  not  probable  that  this  character  should 
have  been  made  up  from  the  instances  in  the  Acts,  which 
relate  solely  to  his  dealings  with  the  Jews.  It  is  not 
probable  that  a  sophist  should  take  Lis  hint  from  those  in- 
stances, and  then  extend  it  so  much  beyond  them  ;  and  it 


THE    FIRST    EPISTLE    TO    THE    CORINTHIANS.  57 

* 

is  still  more  incredible  that  the  two  instances  in  the  Acts, 
circumstantially  related  and  interwoven  with  the  history, 
should  have  been  fabricated  in  order  to  suit  the  character 
which  St.  Paul  gives  of  himself  in  the  epistle. 


No.   VIII. 

Chap.  i.  14 — 17.  "I  thank  God  that  I  baptized  none 
of  you  but  Crispus  and  Gaius,  lest  any  should  say  that  I 
baptized  in  my  own  name  ;  and  I  baptized  also  the  house- 
hold of  Stephanas  :  besides,  I  know  not  whether  I  bap- 
tized any  other  ;  for  Christ  sent  me  not  to  baptize,  but  to 
preach  the  Gospel." 

It  may  be  expected  that  those  whom  the  apostle  bap- 
tized with  his  own  hands  were  converts  distinguished 
from  the  rest  by  some  circumstance,  either  of  eminence, 
or  of  connection  with  him.  Accordingly,  of  the  three 
names  here  mentioned,  Crispus,  we  find,  from  Acts,  xviii. 
8,  was  a  "  chief  ruler  of  the  Jewish  synagogue  at  Corinth, 
who  believed  in  the  Lord,  with  all  his  house."  Gaius,  it 
appears  from  Romans,  xvi.  23,  was  St.  Paul's  host  at 
Corinth,  and  the  host,  he  tells  us,  "  of  the  whole  church." 
The  household  of  Stephanas,  we  read  in  the  sixteenth 
chapter  of  this  epistle,  "were  the  first-fruits  of  Achaia." 
Here,  therefore,  is  the  propriety  we  expected  :  and  it  is  a 
proof  of  reality  not  to  be  contemned  ;  for  their  names 
appearing  in  the  several  places  in  which  they  occur,  with 
a  mark  of  distinction  belonging  to  each,  could  hardly  be 
the  effect  of  chance,  without  any  truth  to  direct  it ;  and, 
on  the  other  hand,  to  suppose  that  they  were  picked  out 
from  these  passages,  and  brought  together  in  the  text  be- 
fore  us,  in  order  to  display  a  conformity  of  names,  is  both 
improbable  in  itself,  and  is  rendered  more  so  by  the  pur- 

3* 


58.  THE    FIRST    EPISTLE    TO    THE    CORINTHIANS. 

pose  for  which  they  are  introduced.  They  come  in  to 
assist  St.Paul*s  exculpation  of  himself,  against  the  possible 
charge  of  having  assumed  the  character  of  the  founder 
of  a  separate  religion,  and  with  no  other  visible,  or,  as  I 
think,  imaginable  design.* 

*  Chap,  i.,  I.  "  Paul  called  to  be  an  apostle  of  Jesus  Christ,  through  the 
will  of  God,  and  Sosthenes,  our  brother,  unto  the  church  of  God  which  is 
at  Corinth."  The  only  account  we  have  of  any  person  who  bore  the  name 
of  Sosthenes  is  found  in  the  eighteenth  chapter  of  the  Acts.  When  the 
Jews  at  Corinth  had  brought  Paul  before  Gallio,  and  Gallio  had  dismissed 
their  complaint  as  unworthy  of  his  interference,  and  had  driven  them  from 
the  judgment-sea'  ;  "then  all  the  Greeks,"  says  the  historian,  "took  Sos- 
thenes, the  chief  ruler  of  the  synagogue,  and  beat  him  before  the  judgment- 
seat."  The  Sosthenes  here  spoken  of  was  a  Corinthian;  and,  if  he  was  a 
Christian,  and  with  St.  Paul  when  he  wrote  this  epistle,  was  likely  enough 
to  be  joined  with  him  in  the  salutation  of  the  Corinthian  church.  But  here 
occurs  a  difficulty.  If  Sosthenes  was  a  Christian  at  the  time  of  this  uproar, 
why  should  the  Greeks  beat  him  1  The  assault  upon  the  Christians  was 
made  by  the  Jews.  It  was  the  Javs  who  had  brought  Paul  before  the  mag- 
istrate. If  it  had  been  the  Jews  also  who  had  beaten  Sosthenes  1  should 
not  have  doubted  but  that  he  had  been  a  favorer  of  St.  Paul,  and  the 
same  person  who  is  joined  with  him  in  the  epistle.  Let  us  see,  therefore, 
whether  there  be  not  some  error  in  our  present  text.  The  Alexandrian 
manuscript  gives  navrcs  alone,  without  ol  'EAXijves,  and  is  followed  in  this 
reading  by  the  Coptic  version,  by  the  Arabic  version,  published  by  Epernius, 
by  the  Vulgate,  and  by  Bede's  Latin  Version.  Three  Greek  manuscripts 
again,  as  well  as  Chrysostom,  give  ol  liviatoi,  in  the  place  of  of,'EAA>?i'Sf. 
A  great  plurality  of  manuscripts  authorize  the  reading  which  is  retained  in 
our  copies.  In  this  variety  it  appears  to  me  extremely  probable  that  the 
historian  originally  wrote  gams  alone,  and  that  ol  EaAijwj,  and  ol  l}i6aiot, 
have  been  respectively  added  as  explanatory  of  what  the  word  xavret  was 
supposed  to  mean.  The  sentence  without  the  addition  of  either  name, 
would  run    very    perspicuously    thus  :  "  xai  aTrijXaw  avrovs  aito  tov  0oi>a~o;' 

tiriXa/Jojitvot  it.  iravrci  YjoJo-Oei/n"  tov  ap-£iovvayo>yov,  trvitrov  ijmQoaOcv  tov  prjjiaroi. 

and  he  drove  them  away  from  the  judgment-seat  ;  and  they  all,"  viz.,  the 
crowd  of  Jews  whom  the  judge  had  bid  begone,  "  took  Sosthenes,  and  beat 
him  before  the  judgment-seat."  It  is  certain  that,  as  the  whole  body  of  the 
people  were  Greeks,  the  application  of  all  to  them  was  unusual  and  hard. 
If  I  was  describing  an  insurrection  at  Paris,  I  might  say  all  the  Jews,  all 
the  Protestants,  or  all  the  English  acted  so  and  so ;  but  I  should  scarcely 
say  all  the  French,  when  the  whole  mass  of  the  community  were  of  that 


THE    FIRST    EPISTLE    TO    THE    CORINTHIANS.  59 


No.  IX. 

Chap.  xvi.  10,  11.  "Now,  if  Timotheus  come,  let  no 
man  despise  him." — Why  despise  him  ?  This  charge  is 
not  given  concerning  any  other  messenger  whom  St.  Paul 
sent :  and,  in  the  different  epistles,  many  such  messengers 
are  mentioned.  Turn  to  1  Timothy,  chap.  iv.  12,  and  you 
will  find  that  Timothy  was  a  young  man,  younger  proba- 
bly than  those  who  were  usually  employed  in  the  Chris- 
tian mission  ;  and  that  St.  Paul,  apprehending  lest  he 
should,  on  that  account,  be  exposed  to  contempt,  urges 
upon  them  the  caution  which  is  there  inserted,  "  Let  no 
man  despise  thy  youth." 


No.  X. 

Chap.  xvi.  1.  "Now,  concerning  the  collection  for  the 
saints,  as  I  have  given  order  to  the  churches  of  Galatia, 
even  so  do  ye." 

The  churches  of  Galatia  and  Phrygia  were  the  last 
churches  which  St.  Paul  had  visited  before  the  writing 
of  this  epistle.  He  was  now  at  Ephesus,  and  he  came 
thither  immediately  from  visiting  these  churches:  "He 
went  over  all  the  country  of  Galatia  and  Phrygia,  in 
order,  strengthening  all  the  disciples.  And  it  came  to 
pass  that  Paul,  having  passed  through  the  upper  coasts," 
(viz.  the  above-named  countries,  called  the  upper  coasts, 
as  being  the  northern  part  of  Asia  Minor,)  "came  to 
Ephesus:"  Acts,   xviii.   23;    xix.    1.     These,    therefore, 

description.  As  what  is  here  offered  is  founded  upon  a  various  reading, 
and  that  m  opposition  to  the  greater  part  of  the  manuscripts  that  arc  extant, 
I  have  not  given  it  a  place  in  the  text. 


60  THE    FIRST    EPISTLE    TO    THE    CORINTHIANS. 

probably,  were  the  last  churches  at  which  he  left  direc- 
tions for  their  public  conduct  during  his  absence.  Al- 
though two  years  intervened  between  his  journey  to 
Ephesus  and  his  writing  this  epistle,  yet  it  does  not  ap- 
pear that  during  that  time  he  visited  any  other  church. 
That  he  had  not  been  silent  when  he  was  in  Galatia,  upon 
this  subject  of  contribution  for  the  poor,  is  farther  made 
out  from  a  hint  which  he  lets  fall  in  his  epistle  to  that 
church  :  "  Only  they  (viz.  the  other  apostles)  would  that 
we  should  remember  the  poor,  the  same  also  which  I  was 
forward  to  do." 


No.    XI. 

Chap.  iv.  18.  "Now,  some  are  pufFed  up,  as  though  I 
would  not  come  unto  you." 

Why  should  they  suppose  that  he  would  not  come? 
Turn  to  the  first  chapter  of  the  Second.  Epistle  to  the 
Corinthians,  and  you  will  find  that  he  had  already  disap- 
pointed them  :  "  I  was  minded  to  come  unto  you  before, 
that  you  might  have  a  second  benefit ;  and  to  pass  by 
you  into  Macedonia,  and  to  come  again  out  of  Macedonia 
unto  you,  and  of  you  to  be  brought  on  my  way  towards 
Judea.  When  I,  therefore,  was  thus  minded,  did  I  use 
lightness?  Or  the  things  thatl  purpose  do  I  purpose  ac- 
cording to  the  flesh,  that  with  me  there  should  be  yea, 
yea,  and  nay,  nay  ?  But,  as  God  is  true,  our  word  toward 
you  was  not  yea  and  nay."  It  appears,  from  this  quota- 
tion, that  he  had  not  only  intended,  but  that  he  had  pro- 
mised them  a  visit  before  ;  for,  otherwise,  why  should  he 
apologize  for  the  change  of  his  purpose,  or  express  so 
much  anxiety  lest  this  change  should  be  imputed  to  any 
culpable    fickleness  in  his  temper  ;    and  lest  he  should 


THE    FIRST    EPISTLE    TO    THE    CORINTHIANS.  61 

thereby  seem  to  the  in  as  one  whose  word  was  not,  in  any 
sort,  to  be  depended  upon?  Besides  which,  the  terms, 
made  use  of  plainly  refer  to  a  promise  :  "  Our  word  to- 
ward you  was  not  yea  and  nay."  St.  Paul  therefore  had 
signified  an  intention  which  he  had  not  been  able  to  exe- 
cute ;  and  this  seeming  breach  of  his  word,  and  the  delay 
of  his  visit,  had,  with  some  who  were  evil  affected  to- 
wards him,  given  birth  to  a  suggestion  that  he  would 
come  no  more  to  Corinth. 


No.   XII. 

Chap.  v.  7,  8;  "  For  even  Christ,  our  passover,  is 
sacrificed  for  us  ;  therefore  let  us  keep  the  feast,  not 
with  old7  leaven,  neither  with  the  leaven  of  malice  and 
wickedness,  but  with  the  unleavened  bread  of  sincerity 
and  truth." 

Dr.  Benson  tells  us  that,  from  this  passage,  compared 
with  chapter  xvi.  8,  it  has  been  conjectured  that  this 
epistle  was  written  about  the  time  of  the  Jewish  pass- 
over  ;  and  to  me  the  conjecture  appears  to  be  very  well 
founded.  The  passage  to  which  Dr.  Benson  refers  us  is 
this :  "  I  will  tarry  at  Ephesus  until  Pentecost."  With 
this  passage  he  ought  to  have  joined  another  in  the  same 
context:  "  And  it  may  be  that  I  will  abide,  yea,  and  win- 
ter with  you;"  for,  from  the  two  passages  laid  together, 
it  follows  that  the  epistle  was  written  before  Pentecost, 
yet  after  winter  ;  which  necessarily  determines  the  date 
to  the  part  of  the  year  within  which  the  passover  falls. 
It  was  written  before  Pentecost,  because  he  says,  "I  will 
tarry  at  Ephesus  until  Pentecost."  It  was  written  after 
winter,  because  he  tells  them,  "  It  may  be  that  I  may 
abide,  yea,  and  winter  with  you."    The  winter  which  the 


62  THE    FIRST    EPISTLE    TO    THE    CORINTHIANS. 

apostle  purposed  to  pass  at  Corinth  was  undoubtedly  the 
winter  next  ensuing  to  the  date  of  the  epistle;  yet  it  was 
a  winter  subsequent  to  the  ensuing  Pentecost,  because  he 
did  not  intend  to  set  forward  upon  his  journey  till  after 
that  feast.  The  words,  "  let  us  keep  the  feast,  not  with 
old  leaven,  neither  with  the  leaven  of  malice  and  wick- 
edness, but  with  the  unleavened  bread  of  sincerity  and 
truth,"  look  very  like  words  suggested  by  the  season  ;  at 
least  they  have,  upon  that  supposition,  a  force  and  signifi- 
cancy  which  do  not  belong  to  them  upon  any  other  ;  and 
it  is  not  a  little  remarkable  that  the  hints  casually  drop- 
ped in  the  epistle  concerning  particular  parts  of  the  year 
should  coincide  with  this  supposition. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

THE  SECOND  EPISTLE  TO  THE  CORINTHIANS. 

No.  I. 

I  will  not  say  that  it  is  impossible,  having  seen  the 
First  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  to  construct  a  second 
with  ostensible  allusions  to  the  first ;  or  that  it  is  impossi- 
ble that  both  should  be  fabricated  so  as  to  carry  on  an 
order  and  continuation  of  story,  by  successive  references 
to  the  same  events.  But  I  say  that  this,  in  either  case, 
must  be  the  effect  of  craft  and  desiern.  Whereas,  who- 
ever  examines  the  allusions  to  the  former  epistle  which 
he  finds  in  this,  whilst  he  will  acknowledge  them  to  be 
such  as  would  rise  spontaneously  to  the  hand  of  the 
writer,  from  the  very  subject  of  the  correspondence,  and 
the  situation  of  the  corresponding  parties,  supposing  these 
to  be  real,  will  see  no  particle  of  reason  to  suspect,  either 
that  the  clauses  containing  these  allusions  were  insertions 
for  the  purpose,  or  that  the  several  transactions  of  the 
Corinthian  church  were  feigned,  in  order  to  form  a  train 
of  narrative,  or  to  support  the  appearance  of  connection 
between  the  two  epistles. 

1.  In  the  First  Epistle,  St.  Paul  announces  his  inten- 
tion of  passing  through  Macedonia,  in  his  way  to  Corinth  : 
"  I  will  come  to  you  when  I  shall  pass  through  Macedo- 
nia." In  the  Second  Epistle,  we  find  him  arrived  in 
Macedonia,  and  about  to  pursue  his  journey  to  Corinth. 
But  observe  the  manner  in  which  this  is  made  to  appear: 


64  SECOND    EIHSTLE    TO    THE    CORINTHIANS. 

"I  know  the  forwardness  of  your  mind,  for  which  I  boast 
of  you  to  them  of  Macedonia,  that  Achaia  was  ready  a 
year  ago,  and  your  zeal  hath  provoked  very  many :  yet 
have  I  sent  the  brethren,  lest  our  boasting  of  you  should 
be  in  vain  in  this  behalf;  that,  as  I  said,  ye  may  be  ready  ; 
lest,  haply,  if  they  of  Macedonia  come  with  me,  and  find 
you  unprepared,  we  (that  we  say  not  you)  be  ashamed  in 
this  same  confident  boasting :"  chap.  ix.  2,  3,  4.  St.  Paul's 
being  in  Macedonia  at  the  time  of  writing  the  epistle,  is, 
in  this  passage,  inferred  only  from  his  saying  that,  he  had 
boasted  to  the  Macedonians  of  the  alacrity  of  his  Achaian 
converts ;  and  the  fear  which  he  expresses,  lest,  if  any 
of  the  Macedonia  Christians  should  come  with  him  unto 
Achaia,  they  should  find  his  boasting  unwarranted  bv  the 
event.  The  business  of  the  contribution  is  the  sole  cause 
of  mentioning  Macedonian  at  all.  Will  it  be  insinuated 
that  this  passage  was  framed  merely  to  state  that  St.  Paul 
was  now  in  Macedonia ;  and  by  that  statement,  to  pro- 
duce an  apparent  agreement  with  the  purpose  of  visiting 
Macedonia,  notified  in  the  First  Epistle  ?  Or  will  it  be 
thought  probable  that,  if  a  sophist  had  meant  to  place  St. 
Paul  in  Macedonia,  for  the  sake  of  giving  countenance  to 
his  forgery,  he  would  have  done  it  in  so  oblique  a  manner 
as  through  the  medium  of  a  contribution  ?  The  same 
thing  may  be  observed  of  another  text  in  the  epistle,  in 
which  the  name  of  Macedonia  occurs:  "Furthermore, 
when  I  came  to  Troas  to  preach  the  Gospel,  and  a  door 
was  opened  unto  me  of  the  Lord,  I  had  no  rest  in  my 
spirit,  because  I  found  not  Titus,  my  brother;  but,  taking 
my  leave  of  them,  I  went  from  thence  into  Macedonia." 
I  mean  that  it  may  be  observed  of  this  passage,  also,  that 
there  is  a  reason  for  mentioning  Macedonia,  entirely  dis- 
tinct from  the  purpose  of  showing  St.  Paul  to  be  there. 
Indeed,  if  the  passage  before  us  show  that  point  at  all,  it 


SECOND    EPISTLE    TO    THE    CORINTHIANS.  65 

shows  it  so  obscurely,  that  Grotius,  though  he  did  not 
doubt  that  Paul  was  now  in  Macedonia,  refers  this  text  to 
a  different  journey.     Is  this  the  hand  of  a  forger,  meditat- 
ing to  establish  a  false  conformity  ?     The  text,  however, 
in  which  it  is  most  strongly  implied  that  St.  Paul  wrote 
the  present  epistle  from  Macedonia,  is  found  in  the  fourth, 
fifth,  and  sixth  verses  of  the  seventh  chapter  :  "  I  am  filled 
with  comfort,  I  am  exceedingly  joyful  in  all  our  tribula- 
tion ;  for,  when  we  were  come  into  Macedonia,  our  flesh 
had  no  rest ;  without  were  fightings,  within  were  fears ; 
nevertheless,  God,  that  comforteth  those  that  are  cast 
down,  comforted  us  by  the  coming  of  Titus."     Yet  even 
here,  I  think,  no  one  will  contend  that  St.  Paul's  coming 
to  Macedonia,  or  being  hr Macedonia,  was  the  principal 
thing  intended  to  be  told  ;  or  that  the  telling  of  it,  indeed, 
was  any  part  of  the  intention  with  which  the   text   was 
written ;  or  that  the  mention  even  of  the  name  of  Mace- 
donia was  not  purely  incidental,  in  the  description  of 
those  tumultuous  sorrows  with  which  the  writer's  mind 
had  been  lately  agitated,  and  from   which  he  was  re- 
lieved by  the  coming  of  Titus.     The  first  five  verses  of 
the  eighth  chapter,  which  commend  the  liberality  of  the 
Macedonian  churches,  do  not,  in  my  opinion,  by  them- 
selves, prove  St.  Paul  to  have  been  at  Macedonia  at  the 
"time  of  writing  the  epistle. 

2.  In  the  First  Epistle,  St  Paul  denounces  a  severe 
censure  against  an  incestuous  marriage,  which  had  taken 
place  amongst  the  Corinthian  converts,  with  the  conniv- 
ance, not  to  say  with  the  approbation,  of  the  church  ;  and 
enjoins  the  church  to  purge  itself  of  this  scandal,  by  ex- 
pelling the  offender  from  its  society  :  <•  It  is  reported  com- 
monly that  there  is  fornication  among  you,  and  such  for- 
nication as  is  not  so  much  as  named  amongst  the  Gentiles, 
that  one  should  have  his  father's  wife  ;  and  ye  are  puffed 


66  SECOND    EPISTLE    TO    THE    CORINTHIANS. 

up,  and  have  not  rather  mourned,  that  he  that  hath  done 
this  deed  might  be  taken  away  from  among  you  ;  for  I  ver- 
ily, as  absent  in  body,  but  present  in  spirit,  have  judged  al- 
ready, as  though  I  were  present,  concerning  him  that  hath 
done  this  deed,  in  the  name  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
when  ye  are  gathered  together,  and  my  spirit,  with  the 
power  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  to  deliver  such  nn  one 
unto  Satan  for  the  destruction  of  the  flesh,  that  the  spirit 
may  be  saved  in  the  day  of  the  Lord  :"  chap.  v.  1 — 5. 
In  the  Second  Epistle  we  find  this  sentence  executed,  and 
the  offender  to  be  so  affected  with  the  punishment  that  St. 
Paul  now  intercedes  for  his  restoration:  "Sufficient  to 
such  a  man  is  this  punishment,  which  was  inflicted  of 
many ;  so  that,  contrariwise,  ye  ought  rather  to  forgive 
him  and  comfort  him,  lest  perhaps  such  an  one  should  be 
swallowed  up  with  overmuch  sorrow;  wherefore  I  be- 
seech you  that  ye  would  confirm  your  love  towards  him  :" 
2  Cor.  chap.  ii.  7,  8.  Is  this  whole  business  feigned  for 
the  sake  of  carrying  on  a  continuation  of  story  through 
the  two  epistles  ?  The  church  also,  no  less  than  the  of- 
fender, was  brought  by  St.  Paul's  reproof  to  a  deep  sense 
of  the  impropriety  of  their  conduct.  Their  penitence, 
and  their  respect  to  his  authority,  were,  as  might  be  ex- 
pected, exceeding  grateful  to  St.  Paul :  "  We  were  com- 
forted not  by  Titus's  coming  only,  but  by  the  consolation 
wherewith  he  was  comforted  in  you,  when  he  told  us 
your  earnest  desire,  your  mourning,  your  fervent  mind 
towards  me,  so  that  I  rejoiced  the  more ;  for,  though  I 
made  you  sorry  with  a  letter,  I  do  not  repent,  though  I 
did  repent:  for  I  perceive  that  the  same  epistle  made  you 
sorry,  though  it  were  but  for  a  season.  Now  I  rejoice, 
not  that  ye  were  made  sorry,  but  that  ye  sorrowed  to  re- 
pentance :  for  ye  were  made  sorry  after  a  godly  manner, 
that  ye  might  receive  damage  by  us  in  nothing  :"  chap. 


SECOND    EPISTLE    TO    THE    CORINTHIANS.  67 

vii.  7—9.  That  this  passage  is  to  be  referred  to  the  in- 
cestuous marriage  is  proved  by  the  twelfth  verse  of  the 
same  chapter :  "  Though  I  wrote  unto  you,  I  did  it  not  for 
his  cause  that  had  done  the  wrong,  nor  for  his  cause 
that  suffered  wrong ;  but  that  our  care  for  you,  in  the 
sight  of  God,  might  appear  unto  you."  There  were,  it 
is  true,  various  topics  of  blame  noticed  in  the  First  Epis- 
tle ;  but  there  was  none,  except  this  of  the  incestuous 
marriage,  which  could  be  called  a  transaction  between 
private  parties,  or  of  which  it  could  be  said  that  one  par- 
ticular person  had  "  done  the  wrong,"  and  another  par- 
ticular person  "  had  suffered  it."  Could  all  this  be  without 
foundation?  or  could  it  be  put  into  the  Second  Epistle 
merely  to  furnish  an  obscure  sequel  to  what  had  been  said 
about  an  incestuous  marriage  in  the  First  ? 

3.  In  the  sixteenth  chapter  of  the  First  Epistle,  a  col- 
lection for  the  saints  is  recommended  to  be  set  forwards 
at  Corinth:   "Now,  concerning   the   collection  for  the 
saints,  as  I  have  given  order  to  the  churches  of  Galatia, 
so  do  ye  :"  chap.  xvi.  1.     In  the  ninth  chapter  of  the  Sec- 
ond Epistle,  such  a  collection  is  spoken  of,  as  in  readi- 
ness to  be  received  :  "  As  touching  the  ministering  to  the 
saints,  it  is  superfluous  for  me  to  write  to  you,  for  I  know 
the  forwardness  of  your  mind,  for  which  I  boast  of  you  to 
them  of  Macedonia,  that  Achaia  was  ready  a  year  ao-o, 
and  your  zeal  hath  provoked  very  many :"  chap.  ix.  1,  2. 
This  is  such  a  continuation  of  the  transaction  as  might  be 
expected  ;   or,  possibly  it  will  be  said,  as  might  easily  be 
counterfeited  ;  but  there  is  a  circumstance  of  nicety  in  the 
agreement  between  the  two  epistles,  which,  I  am  convin- 
ced, the  author  of  a  forgery  would  not  have  hit  upon,  or 
which,  if  he  had  hit  upon  it,  he  would  have  set  forth  with 
more  clearness.     The  Second  Epistle  speaks  to  the  Corin- 
thians as  having  begun  this  eleemosynary  business  a  year 


68  SECOND    EPISTLE    TO    THE    CORINTHIANS. 

before :  "  This  is  expedient  for  you,  who  have  begun  before 
not  only  to  do,  but  also  to  be  forward  a  year  ago :"  chap. 
viii.  10.  "I  boast  of  you  to  them  of  Macedonia,  that 
Achaia  was  ready  a  year  ago  :"  chap.  ix.  2.  From  these 
texts  it  is  evident  that  something  had  been  done  in  the 
business  a  year  before.  It  appears,  however,  from  other 
texts  in  the  epistle,  that  the  contribution  was  not  yet  col- 
lected or  paid ;  for  brethren  were  sent  from  St.  Paul  to 
Corinth,  ■  to  make  up  their  bounty  ;"  chap.  ix.  5.  They 
are  urged  "to  perform  the  doing  of  it:"  chap.  viii.  11. 
"  And  every  man  was  exhorted  to  give  as  he  purposed  in 
his  heart :"  chap.  ix.  7.  The  contribution,  therefore,  as 
represented  in  our  present  epistle,  was  in  readiness,  yet 
not  received  from  the  contributors ;  was  begun,  was  for- 
ward long  before,  yet  not  hitherto  collected.  Now,  this 
representation  agrees  with  one,  and  only  with  one,  sup- 
position, namely,  that  every  man  had  laid  by  in  store,  had 
already  provided,  the  fund  from  which  he  was  afterwards 
to  contribute — the  very  case  which  the  First  Epistle  au- 
thorizes us  to  suppose  to  have  existed ;  for  in  that  epistle 
St.  Paul  had  charged  the  Corinthians,  "  upon  the  first  day 
of  the  week,  every  one  of  them,  to  lay  by  in  store  as  God 
had  prospered  him  :"*   1  Cor.,  chap.  xvi.  2. 

*  The  following  observations  will  satisfy  us  concerning  the  purity  of  our 
apostle's  conduct  in  the  suspicious  business  of  a  pecuniary  contribution. 

1.  He  disclaims  the  having  received  any  inspired  authority  for  the  direc- 
tions which  lie  is  giving :  "  I  speak  not  by  commandment,  but  by  occasion 
of  ihe  forwardness  of  others,  and  to  prove  the  sincerity  of  your  love:"  2  Cor. 
chap.  viii.  8.  Who  that  had  a  sinister  purpose  to  answer  by  the  recom- 
mending of  subscriptions  would  thus  distinguish,  and  thus  lower  the  credit 
of  his  own  n  c     im  ad  ition  1 

'J.  Although  he  assi  its  the  general  right  of  Christian  ministers  to  a  main- 
tenance from  tlnir  ministry,  yet  he  protests  against  the  nuking  use  of  this 
right  in  his  own  pi  rson.  "  Even  so  hath  the  Lord  ordained,  that  they  which 
preach  the  Gospel  should  live  of  the  Gospel;  but  I  have  used  none  of  these 
things,  neither  iave  I  written  these  things  that  it  should  be  so  done  unto 


SECOND    EPISTLE    TO    THE    CORINTHIANS.  69 


No.  II. 

In  comparing  the  Second  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians 
with  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  we  are  soon  brought  to  ob- 
serve not  only  that  there  exists  no  vestige  either  of  the 
epistle  having  been  taken  from  the  history,  or  the  history 
from  the  epistle ;  but,  also,  that  there  appears  in  the  con- 
tents of  the  epistle  positive  evidence  that  neither  was  bor- 
rowed from  the  other.  Titus,  who  bears  a  conspicuous 
part  in  the  epistle,  is  not  mentioned  in  the  Acts  of  the 
Apostles  at  all.  St.  Paul's  sufferings,  enumerated  chap, 
xi.  24, — "  of  the  Jews  five  times  received  I  forty  stripes 
save  one ;  thrice  was  I  beaten  with  rods ;  once  was  I 
stoned ;  thrice  I  suffered  shipwreck  ;  a  night  and  day  I 
have  been  in  the  deep," — cannot  be  made  out  from  his 
history  as  delivered  in  the  Acts ;  nor  would  this  account 

me ;  for  it  were  better  for  me  to  die  than  that  any  man  should  make  my 
glorying,  i.  c.  my  professions  of  disinterestedness,  void:"  1  Cor.,  chap.  ix. 
14,  15. 

3.  He  repeatedly  proposes  that  there  should  be  associates  with  himself  in 
the  management  of  the  public  bounty;  not  colleagues  of  his  own  appoint- 
ment, but  persons  elected  for  that  purpose  by  the  contributors  themselves. 
•  And,  when  I  come,  whomsoever  ye  shall  approve  by  your  letters,  them 
will  I  send  to  bring  your  liberality  unto  Jerusalem;  and,  if  it  be  meet  that  I 
go  also,  they  shall  go  with  me:"  1  Cor.,  chap.  xvi.  ?>.  1.  And.  in  the  Sec- 
ond Epistle,  what  is  here  proposed,  we  find  actually  done,  and  done  for  the 
very  purpose  of  guarding  his  character  against  any  imputation  that  might 
be  brought  upon  it,  in  the  discharge  of  a  pecuniary  trust:  "  And  we  have 
sent  with  him  the  brother,  whose  praise  is  in  the  Gospel  throughout  all  the 
churches;  and  not  that  only,  but  who  was  also  chosen  of  the  churches  to 
travel  with  us  with  this  grace  (gift)  which  is  administered  by  ustotheglory 
ofthe  same  Lord,  and  the  declaration  of  your  ready  mind:  avoiding  this, 
that  no  man  should  blame  us  in  this  abundance  which  is  administered  by 
us  ;  providing  for  things  honest,  not  only  in  the  sight  of  the  Lord,  but  also 
in  the  sight  of  men;  "  i.  c,  not  resting  in  the  consciousness  of  our  own  in- 
tegrity, bat,  in  such  a  subject,  careful  also  to  approve  our  integrity  to  the 
public  judgment :  2  Cor.,  chap.  viii.    18 — 21. 


70  SECOND    EPISTLE    TO    THE    CORINTHIANS. 

have  been  given  by  a  writer  who  either  drew  his  knowl- 
edge of  St.  Paul  from  that  history,  or  who  was  careful 
to  preserve  a  conformity  with  it.  The  account,  in  the 
epistle,  of  St.  Paul's  escape  from  Damascus,  though 
agreeing  in  the  main  fact  with  the  account  of  the  same 
transaction  in  the  Acts,  is  related  with  such  difference  of 
circumstance  as  renders  it  utterly  improbable  that  one 
should  be  derived  from  the  other.  The  two  accounts, 
placed  by  the  side  of  each  other,  stand  as  follows : — 

2  Cor.,  chap,  xi.,32,  33.  Acts,  chap.  ix.  23 — 25. 

In  Damascus,  the  governor,  under  And,  after  many  days  were  ful- 
Aretas  the  king,  kept  the  city  of  the  filled,  the  Jews  took  counsel  to  kill 
Damascenes  with  a  garrison,  desi-  him ;  but  their  laying  in  wait  was 
rous  to  apprehend  vie ;  and  through  known  of  Saul.  And  they  watched 
a  window  in  a  basket  was  I  let  down  the  gates  day  and  night  to  kill  him  : 
by  the  wall,  and  escaped  his  hands,      then  the  disciples  took  him  by  night, 

and  let  him  down  by  the  wall  in  a 
basket. 

Now,  if  we  be  satisfied  in  general  concerning  these 
two  ancient  writings,  that  the  one  was  not  known  to  the 
writer  of  the  other,  or  not  consulted  by  him ;  then  the 
accordances  which  may  be  pointed  out  between  them 
will  admit  of  no  solution  so  probable  as  the  attributing 
of  them  to  truth  and  reality,  as  to  their  common  foun- 
dation. 


No.  III. 

The  opening  of  this  epistle  exhibits  a  connection  with 
the  history,  which  alone  would  satisfy  my  mind  that  the 
epistle  was  written  by  St.  Paul,  and  by  St.  Paul  in  the 
situation  in  which  the  history  places  him.  Let  it  be  re- 
membered that,  in  the  nineteenth  chapter  of  the  Acts,  St. 
Paul  is  represented  as  driven  away  from  Ephesus,  or  as 


SECOND    EPISTLE    TO    TIIF,    CORINTHIANS.  71 

leaving  however  Ephesus  in  consequence  of  an  uproar 
in  that  city,  excited  by  some  interested  adversaries  of  the 
new  religion.  The  account  of  the  tumult  is  as  follows  : 
"  When  they  heard  these  sayings,"  viz.  Demetrius's  com- 
plaint of  the  danger  to  be  apprehended  from  St.  Paul's 
ministry  to  the  established  worship  of  the  Ephesian  god- 
dess, <;  they  were  full  of  wrath,  and  cried  out,  saying, 
Great  is  Diana  of  the  Ephesiuns.  And  the  whole  city 
was  filled  with  confusion  ;  and,  having  caught  Gaius  and 
Aristarchus,  Paul's  companions  in  travel,  they  rushed 
with  one  accord  into  the  theatre.  And,  when  Paul  would 
have  entered  in  unto  the  people,  the  disciples  suffered  him 
not ;  and  certain  of  the  chief  of  Asia,  which  were  his 
friends,  sent  unto  him,  desiring  that  he  would  not  adven- 
ture himself  into  the  theatre.  Some,  therefore,  cried  one 
thing,  and  some  another :  for  the  assembly  was  confused, 
and  the  more  part  knew  not  wherefore  they  were  come 
together.  And  they  drew  Alexander  out  of  the  multi- 
tude, the  Jews  putting  him  forward  ;  and  Alexander  beck- 
oned with  his  hand,  and  would  have  made  his  defence 
unto  the  people  ;  but,  when  they  knew  that  he  was  a 
Jew,  all  with  one  voice,  about  the  space  of  two  hours, 
cried  out,  Great  is  Diana  of  the  Ephesians. — And,  after 
the  uproar  was  ceased,  Paul  called  unto  him  the  disciples 
and  embraced  them,  and  departed  for  to  go  into  Mace- 
donia." When  he  was  arrived  in  Macedonia,  he  wrote 
the  Second  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians  which  is  now  be- 
fore us ;  and  he  begins  his  epistle  in  this  wise  :  "  Blessed 
be  God,  even  the  Father  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the 
Father  of  mercies,  and  the  God  of  all  comfort,  who  com- 
forteth  us  in  all  our  tribulation,  that  we  may  be  able  to 
comfort  them  which  are  in  any  trouble,  by  the  comfort 
wherewith  we  ourselves  are  comforted  of  God.  For,  as 
the  sufferings  of  Christ  abound  in  us,  so  our  consolation 


72  SECOND    EPISTLE    TO    THE    COEINTHIANS. 

also  aboundeth  by  Christ ;  and,  whether  we  be  afflicted, 
it  is  for  your  consolation  and  salvation,  which  is  effectual 
in  the  enduring  of  the  same  sufferings  which  we  also  suf- 
fer ;  or  whether  we  be  comforted,  it  is  for  your  consola- 
tion and  salvation  :  and  our  hope  of  you  is  steadfast,  know- 
ing that,  as  ye  are  partakers  of  the  sufferings,  so  shall  ye 
be  also  of  the  consolation.  For  we  would  not,  brethren, 
have  you  ignorant  of  our  trouble  which  came  to  us  in 
Asia,  that  we  were  pressed  out  of  measure,  above 
strength,  insomuch  that  we  despaired  even  of  life :  but 
we  had  the  sentence  of  death  in  ourselves,  that  we  should 
not  trust  in  ourselves,  but  in  God,  which  raiseth  the  dead, 
who  delivered  us  from  so  great  a  death,  and  doth  deliver  ; 
in  whom  we  trust  that  he  will  yet  deliver  us."  Nothing 
could  be  more  expressive  of  the  circumstances  in  which 
the  history  describes  St.  Paul  to  have  been,  at  the  time 
when  the  epistle  purports  to  be  written  ;  or,  rather, 
nothing  could  be  more  expressive  of  the  sensations 
arising  from  these  circumstances,  than  this  passage.  It 
is  the  calm  recollection  of  a  mind  enlerged  from  the 
confusion  of  instant  danger.  It  is  that  devotion  and  so- 
lemnity of  thought  which  follows  a  recent  deliverance. 
There  is  just  enough  of  particularity  in  the  passage  to 
show  that  it  is  to  be  referred  to  the  tumult  at  Ephesus : 
"  We  would  not,  brethren,  have  you  ignorant  of  our  trou- 
ble which  came  to  us  in  Asia."  And  there  is  nothing 
more:  no  mention  of  Demetrius,  of  the  seizure  of  St. 
Paul's  friends,  of  the  interference  of  the  town-clerk,  of 
the  occasion  or  nature  of  the  danger  which  St.  Paul  had 
escaped,  or  even  of  the  city  where  it  happened;  in  a 
word,  no  recital  from  which  a  suspicion  could  be  con- 
ceived, either  that  the  author  of  the  epistle  had  made  use 
of  the  narrative  in  the  Acts;  or,  on  the  other  hand,  that 
he  had  sketched  the  outline,  which   the  narrative   in  the 


SECOND    EPISTLE    TO    THE    CORINTHIANS.  73 

Acts  only  filled  up.  That  the  forger  of  an  epistle,  under 
the  name  of  St.  Paul,  should  borrow  circumstances  from 
a  history  of  St.  Paul  then  extant ;  or,  that  the  author  of 
a  history  of  St.  Paul  should  gather  materials  from  letters 
bearing  St.  Paul's  name,  may  be  credited  :  but  I  cannot 
believe  that  any  forger  whatever  should  fall  upon  an  ex- 
pedient so  refined  as  to  exhibit  sentiments  adapted  to  a 
situation,  and  to  leave  his  readers  to  seek  out  that  situ- 
ation from  the  history ;  still  less  that  the  author  of  a  his- 
tory should  go  about  to  frame  facts  and  circumstances, 
fitted  to  supply  the  sentiments  which  he  found  in  the  let- 
ter. It  may  be  said,  perhaps,  that  it  does  not  appear  from 
the  history  that  any  danger  threatened  St.  Paul's  life,  in 
the  uproar  at  Ephesus,  so  imminent  as  that  from  which  in 
the  epistle  he  represents  himself  to  have  been  delivered. 
This  matter,  it  is  true,  is  not  stated  by  the  historian  in 
form  ;  but  the  personal  danger  of  the  apostle,  we  cannot 
doubt,  must  have  been  extreme,  when  the  "  whole  city 
was  filled  with  confusion ;"  when  the  populace  had 
"  seized  his  companions  ;"  when,  in  the  distraction  of  his 
mind,  he  insisted  upon  "coming  forth  amongst  them;" 
when  the  Christians  who  were  about  him  "  would  not 
suffer  him;"  when  "his  friends,  certain  of  the  chief  of 
Asia,  sent  to  him,  desiring  that  he  would  not  adventure 
himself  in  the  tumult ;"  when,  lastly,  he  was  obliged  to 
quit  immediately  the  place  and  the  country,  "  and,  when 
the  tumult  was  ceased,  to  depart  into  Macedonia."  All 
which  particulars  are  found  in  the  narration,  and  justify 
St.  Paul's  own  account,  "  that  he  was  pressed  out  of 
measure,  above  strength,  insomuch  that  he  despaired 
even  of  life  ;  that  he  had  the  sentence  of  death  in  him- 
self;" i.e.,  that  he  looked  upon  himself  as  a  man  con- 
demned to  die. 

4 


74  THE    SECOND    EriSTLE    TO    THE    CORINTHIANS. 

No.  IV. 

It  has  already  been  remarked,  that  St.  Paul's  original 
intention  was  to  have  visited  Corinth  in  his  way  to  Mace- 
donia :  {:  I  was  minded  to  come  unto  you  before,  and  to 
pass  by  you  into  Macedonia:"  2  Cor.,  chap.  i.  15,  16.  It 
has  also  been  remarked  that  he  changed  his  intention, 
and  ultimately  resolved  upon  going  through  Macedonia 
first.  Now  upon  this  head  there  exists  a  circumstance 
of  correspondency  between  our  epistle  and  the  history, 
which  is  not  very  obvious  to  the  reader's  observation ; 
but  which,  when  observed,  will  be  found,  I  think,  close 
and  exact.  Which  circumstance  is  this  :  that,  though  the 
change  of  St.  Paul's  intention  be  expressly  mentioned 
only  in  the  Second  Epistle,  yet  it  appears,  both  from  the 
history  and  from  this  Second  Epistle,  that  the  change  had 
taken  place  before  the  writing  of  the  first  epistle ;  that  it 
appears  however  from  neither,  otherwise  than  by  an  in- 
ference, unnoticed  perhaps  by  almost  every  one  who  does 
not  sit  down  professedly  to  the  examination. 

First,  then,  how  does  this  point  appear  from  the  his- 
tory ?  In  the  nineteenth  chapter  of  the  Acts,  and  the 
twenty-first  verse,  we>  are  told  that  "Paul  purposed  in 
the  spirit,  when  he  had  passed  through  Macedonia  and 
Achaia,  to  go  to  Jerusalem.  So  he  sent  into  Macedonia 
two  of  them  that  ministered  unto  him,  Timotheus  and 
Erastus;  but  he  himself  stayed  in  Asia  for  a  season."  A 
short  time  after  this,  and  evidently  in  pursuance  of  the 
same  intention,  we  find  (chap.  xx.  1,  2),  that  "Paul  de- 
parted from  Ephesus  for  to  go  into  Macedonia :  and  that, 
when  he  had  gone  over  those  parts,  he  came  into  Greece." 
The  resolution  therefore  of  passing  first  through  Ma- 
cedonia, and  from  thence  into  Greece,  was  formed  by 


THE    SECOND    EPISTLE    TO    THE    CORINTHIANS.  75 

St.  Paul  previously  to  the  sending  away  of  Timothy. 
The  order  in  which  the  two  countries  are  mentioned, 
shows  the  direction  of  his  intended  route ;  "  when  he  had 
passed  through  Macedonia  and  Achaia."  Timothy  and 
Erastus,  who  were  to  precede  him  in  his  progress,  were 
sent  by  him  from  Ephesus  into  Macedonia.  He  himself 
a  short  time  afterwards,  and,  as  hath  been  observed,  ev- 
idently in  continuation  and  pursuance  of  the  same  design, 
"  departed  for  to  go  into  Macedonia."  If  he  had  ever, 
therefore,  entertained  a  different  plan  of  his  journey,  which 
is  not  hinted  in  the  history,  he  must  have  changed  that  plan 
before  this  time.  But,  from  the  seventeenth  verse  of  the 
fourth  chapter  of  the  First  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  we 
discover  that  Timothy  had  been  sent  away  from  Ephesus 
before  that  epistle  was  written :  "  For  this  cause  have  I 
sent  unto  you  Timotheus,  who  is  my  beloved  son."  The 
change,  therefore,  of  St.  Paul's  resolution,  which  was 
prior  to  the  sending  away  of  Timothy,  was  necessarily 
prior  to  the  writing  of  the  First  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians. 
Thus  stands  the  order  of  dates,  as  collected  from  the 
history,  compared  with  the  First  Epistle.  Now  let  us  in- 
quire, secondly,  how  this  matter  is  represented  in  the 
epistle  before  us.  In  the  sixteenth  verse  of  the  first  chap- 
ter of  this  epistle,  St.  Paul  speaks  of  the  intention  which 
he  had  once  entertained  of  visiting  Achaia,  in  his  way  to 
Macedonia :  "  In  this  confide'nce  I  was  minded  to  come 
unto  you  before,  that  ye  might  have  a  second  benefit ;  and 
to  pans  by  you  into  Macedonia."  After  protesting,  in  the 
seventeenth  verse,  against  any  evil  construction  that 
might  be  put  upon  his  laying  aside  of  this  intention, 
in  the  twenty-third  verse  he  discloses  the  cause  of  it : 
"Moreover,  I  call  God  for  a  record  upon  my  soul,  that 
to  spare  you,  I  came  not  as  yet  unto  Corinth."  And  then 
he  proceeds  as  follows :  "  But  I  determined  this  with  my- 


76  THE    SECOND    EPISTLE    TO    THE    CORINTHIANS. 

self,  that  I  would  not  come  again  to  you  in  heaviness ; 
for,  if  I  make  you  sorry,  who  is  he  then  that  maketh  me 
glad,  but  the  same  which  is  made  sorry  by  me  1  And  I 
wrote  this  same  unto  you,  lest  when  I  came  I  should  have 
sorrow  from  them  of  whom  I  ought  to  rejoice ;  having 
confidence  in  you  all,  that'  my  joy  is  the  joy  of  you  all  ; 
for,  out  of  much  affliction  and  anguish  of  heart,  /  wrote 
unto  you  with  many  tears  ;  not  that  ye  should  be  grieved, 
but  that  ye  might  know  the  love  which  I  have  more  abun- 
dantly unto  you  ;  but,  if  any  have  caused  grief,  he  hath 
not  grieved  me  but  in  part,  that  I  may  not  overcharge 
you  all.  Sufficient  to  such  a  man  is  this  punishment, 
which  was  inflicted  of  many."  In  this  quotation,  let 
the  reader  first  direct  his  attention  to  the  clause  marked 
by  Italics,  "  and  I  wrote  this  same  unto  you,"  and  let  him 
consider,  whether,  from  the  context,  and  from  the  struc- 
ture of  the  whole  passage,  it  be  not  evident  that  this  writ- 
ins  was  after  St.  Paul  had  "  determined  with  himself,  that 
he  would  not  come  again  to  them  in  heaviness  ?"  whether, 
indeed,  it  was  not  in  consequence  of  this  determination, 
or  at  least  with  this  determination  upon  his  mind  1  And, 
in  the  next  place,  let  him  consider  whether  the  sentence, 
"  I  determined  this  with  myself,  that  I  would  not  come 
again  to  you  in  heaviness,"  do  not  plainly  refer  to  that  post- 
poning of  his  visit  to  which  he  had  alluded  in  the  verse 
but  one  before,  when  he  said,  "  I  call  God  for  a  record 
upon  my  soul,  that,  to  spare  you,  I  came  not  as  yet  unto 
Corinth :"  and  whether  this  be  not  the  visit  of  which  he 
speaks  in  the  sixteenth  verse,  wherein  he  informs  the  Co- 
rinthians "  that  he  had  been  minded  to  pass  by  them  into 
Macedonia  :"  but  that,  for  reasons  which  argued  no  levity 
or  fickleness  in  his  disposition,  he  had  been  compelled  to 
change  his  purpose.  If  this  be  so,  then  it  follows  that  the 
writing  here  mentioned  was  posterior  to  the  change  of 


THi:    SECOND    EPISTLE    TO    THE    CORINTHIANS.  77 

his  intention.  The  only  question,  therefore,  that  remain? 
will  be,  whether  this  writing  relate  to  the  letter  which  we 
now  have  under  the  title  of  the  First  Epistle  to  the  Co- 
rinthians, or  to  some  other  letter  not  extant?  And  upon 
this  question  I  think  Mr.  Locke's  observation  decisive  ; 
nameiy,  that  the  second  clause  marked  in  the  quotation 
by  Italics,  "I  wrote  unto  you  with  many  tears,"  and  the 
first  clause  so  marked,  "I  wrote  this  same  unto  you,"  be- 
long to  one  writing,  whatever  that  was  ;  and  that  the  sec- 
ond clause  goes  on  to  advert  to  a  circumstance  which 
is  found  in  our  present  First  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians; 
namely,  the  case  and  punishment  of  the  incestuous  per- 
son. Upon  the  whole,  then,  we  see  that  it  is  capable  of 
being  inferred  from  St.  Paul's  own  words,  in  the  long  ex- 
tract which  we  have  quoted,  that  the  First  Epistle  to  the 
Corinthians  was  written  after  St.  Paul  had  determined  to 
postpone  his  journey  to  Corinth  ;  in  other  words,  that  the 
change  of  his  purpose  with  respect  to  the  course  of  his 
journey,  though  expressly  mentioned  only  in  the  Second 
Epistle,  had  taken  place  before  the  writing  of  the  First ; 
the  point  which  we  made  out  to  be  implied  in  the  history, 
by  the  order  of  the  events  there  recorded,  and  the  allu- 
sions to  those  events  in  the  First  Epistle.  Now  this  is  a 
species  of  congruity  of  all  others  the  most  to  be  relied 
upon.  It  is  not  an  agreement  between  two  accounts  of 
the  same  transaction,  or  between  different  statements  of 
the  same  fact,  for  the  fact  is  not  stated  ;  nothing  that  can 
be  called  an  account  is  given ;  but  it  is  the  junction  of 
two  conclusions,  deduced  from  independent  sources,  and 
deducible  only  by  investigation  and  comparison. 

This  point,  viz.  the  change  of  the  route,  being  prior  to 
the  writing  of  the  First  Epistle,  also  falls  in  with,  and  ac- 
counts for,  the  manner  in  which  he  speaks  in  that  epistle 
of  his  journey.     His  first   intention  had  been,  as  he  here 


78  THE    SECOND    EPISTLE    TO    THE    CORINTHIANS. 

declares,  to  "  pass  by  them  into  Macedonia :"  that  inten- 
tion having  been  previously  given  up,  he  writes,  in  his 
First  Epistle,  "  that  he  would  not  see  them  now  by  the 
way,"  i.  e.  as  he  must  have  done  upon  his  first  plan  ;  but 
"  that  he  trusted  to  tarry  a  while  with  them,  and  possibly 
to  abide,  yea,  and  winter  with  them  :"  1  Cor.,  chap.  xvi. 
5,  6.  It  also  accounts  for  a  singularity  in  the  text  re- 
ferred to,  which  must  strike  every  reader;  "  I  will  come 
to  you  when  I  pass  through  Macedonia  ;  for  I  do  pass 
through  Macedonia."  The  supplemental  sentence,  "  for 
I  do  pass  through  Macedonia,"  imports  that  there  had 
been  some  previous  communication  upon  the  subject  of 
the  journey  ;  and  also  that  there  had  been  some  vacillation 
and  indecisiveness  in  the  apostle's  plan :  both  which  we 
now  perceive  to  have  been  the  case.  The  sentence  is  as 
much  as  to  say,  "  This  is  what  I  at  last  resolve  upon."  The 
expression,  "6tuv  Jhtxtdoviap  dieldw"  is  ambiguous  ;  it  may 
denote  either  "  when  I  pass,  or  when  I  shall  have  passed, 
through  Macedonia  :"  the  considerations  offered  above 
fix  it  to  the  latter  sense.  Lastly,  the  point  we  have  en- 
deavored to  make  out  confirms,  or  rather,  indeed,  is  nec- 
essary to  the  support  of,  a  conjecture  which  forms  the 
subject  of  a  number  in  our  observations  upon  the  First 
Epistle,  that  the  insinuation  of  certain  of  the  church  of 
Corinth,  that  he  would  come  no  more  amongst  them,  was 
founded  on  some  previous  disappointment  of  their  expec- 
tations. 


No.  V. 

But,  if  St.  Paul  had  changed  his  purpose  before  the 
writing  of  the  First  Epistle,  why  did  he  defer  explaining 
himself  to  the  Corinthians,  concerning  the  reason  of  that 


THE    SECOND    EPISTLE    TO    THE    CORINTHIANS.  79 

change,  until  he  wrote  the  Second?  This  is  a  very  fail- 
question  :  and  we  are  able,  I  think,  to  return  to  it  a  satis- 
factory answer.  The  real  cause,  and  the  cause  at  length 
assigned  by  St.  Paul,  for  postponing  his  visit  to  Corinth, 
and  not  travelling  by  the  route  which  he  had  at  first  de- 
signed, was  the  disorderly  state  of  the  Corinthian  church 
at  the  time,  and  the  painful  severities  which  he  should  have 
found  himself  obliged  to  exercise,  if  he  had  come  amongst 
them  during  the  existence  of  these  irregularities.  He  was 
willing  therefore  to  try,  before  he  came  in  person,  what 
a  letter  of  authoritative  objurgation  would  do  amongst 
them,  and  to  leave  time  for  the  operation  of  the  experi- 
ment. That  was  his  scheme  in  writing  the  First  Epistle. 
But  it  was  not  for  him  to  acquaint  them  with  the  scheme. 
After  the  Epistle  had  produced  its  effect  (and  to  the  ut- 
most extend,  as  it  should  seem,  of  the  apostle's  hopes) ; 
when  he  had  wrought  in  them  a  deep  sense  of  their  fault, 
and  an  almost  passionate  solicitude  to  restore  themselves 
to  the  approbation  of  their  teacher ;  when  Titus  (chap, 
vii.  G,  7,  11),  had  brought  him  intelligence  "of  their  ear- 
nest desire,  their  mourning,  their  fervent  mind  towards 
him,  of  their  sorrow  and  their  penitence ;  what  careful- 
ness, what  clearing  of  themselves,  what  indignation,  what 
fear,  what  vehement  desire,  what  zeal,  what  revenge," 
his  letter,  and  the  general  concern  occasioned  by  it,  had 
excited  amongst  them  ;  he  then  opens  himself  fully  upon 
the  subject.  The  affectionate  mind  of  the  apostle  is 
touched  by  this  return  of  zeal  and  duty.  He  tells  them 
that  he  did  not  visit  them  at  the  time  proposed,  lest  their 
meeting  should  have  been  attended  with  mutual  grief; 
and  with  grief,  to  him,  imbittered  by  the  reflection  that 
he  was  giving  pain  to  those  from  whom  alone  he  could 
receive  comfort:  "I  determined  this  with  myself,  that  I 
would  not  come  again  to  you  in  heaviness  ;  for,  if  I  make 


80  SECOND    EPISTLE    TO    THE    CORINTHIANS. 

you  sorry,  who  is  he  that  maketh  me  glad,  but  the  same 
which  is  made  sorry  by  me?"  chap.  ii.  1,  2  ;  that  he  had 
written  his  former  epistle  to  warn  them  beforehand  of 
their  fault,  "  lest  when  he  came  he  should  have  sorrow  of 
them  of  whom  he  ought  to  rejoice,"  chap.  ii.  3;  that  he 
had  the  farther  view,  though  perhaps  unperceived  by 
them,  of  making  an  experiment  of  their  fidelity,  "  to  know 
the  proof  of  them,  whether  they  are  obedient  in  all 
things,"  chap.  ii.  9.  This  full  discovery  of  his  motive 
came  very  naturally  from  the  apostle,  after  he  had  seen 
the  success  of  his  measures,  but  would  not  have  been  a 
seasonable  communication  before.  The  whole  composes 
a  train  of  sentiment  and  of  conduct  resulting  from  real 
situation,  and  from  real  circumstances,  and  as  remote  *s 
possible  from  fiction  or  imposture. 

No.  VI. 

Chap.  xi.  9.  "  When  I  was  present  with  you,  and 
wanted,  I  was  chargeable  to  no  man  :  for  that  which  was 
lacking  to  me,  the  brethren  which  came  from  Macedonia 
supplied."  The  principal  fact  set  forth  in  this  passage, 
the  arrival  at  Corinth  of  brethren  from  Macedonia  during 
St.  Paul's  first  residence  in  that  city,  is  explicitly  re- 
corded, Acts,  chap,  xviii.  1,5;  "  After  these  things,  Paul 
departed  from  Athens  and  came  to  Corinth.  And  when 
Silas  and  Timotheus  were  come  from  Macedonia,  Paul 
was  pressed  in  spirit,  and  testified  to  the  Jews  that  Jesus 
was  Christ." 

No.   VII. 

The  above  quotation  from  the  Acts  proves  that  Silas 
and  Timotheus  were  assisting  to  St.  Paul  in  preaching 


SECOND    EPISTLE    TO    THE    CORINTHIANS.  81 

the  Gospel  at  Corinth.  With  which  correspond  the 
words  of  the  epistle,  chap.  i.  19 :  "  For  the  Son  of  God, 
Jesus  Christ,  who  was  preached  among  you  by  us,  even 
by  me,  and  Silvanus,  and  Timotheus,  was  not  yea  and 
nay,  but  in  him  was  yea."  I  do  admit  that  the  corres- 
pondency, considered  by  itself,  is  too  direct  and  obvious ; 
and  that  an  impostor  with  the  history  before  him  might, 
and  probably  would,  produce  agreements  of  the  same 
kind.  But  let  it  be  remembered,  that  this  reference  is 
found  in  a  writing  which,  from  many  discrepancies,  and 
especially  from  those  noted  No.  II.,  we  may  conclude, 
was  not  composed  by  any  one  who  had  consulted,  and 
who  pursued,  the  history.  Some  observation  also  arises 
upon  the  variation  of  the  name.  We  read  Silas  in  the 
Acts,  Silvanus  in  the  epistle.  The  similitude  of  these 
two  names,,  if  they  were  the  names  of  different  persons, 
is  greater  than  could  easily  have  proceeded  from  acci- 
dent ;  I  mean,  that  it  is  not  probable  that  two  persons 
placed  in  situations  so  much  alike  should  bear  names  so 
nearly  resembling  each  other.*  On  the  other  hand,  the 
difference  of  the  name  in  the  two  passages  negatives  the 
supposition  of  the  passages,  or  the  account  contained  in 
them,  being  transcribed  either  from  the  other. 


No.    VIII. 

Chap.  ii.  12,  13.  "  When  I  came  to  Troas  to  preach 
Christ's  Gospel,  and  a  door  was  opened  unto  me  of  the 
Lord,  I  had  no  rest  in  my  spirit,  because  I  found  not 
Titus  my  brother;  but,  taking  my  leave  of  them,  I  went 
from  thence  into  Macedonia." 

*  That  they  were  the  same  person  is  further  comfirmed  by  1  Thess.  chap. 
i.  1,  compared  with  Acts,  chap.  xvii.    10. 

I- 


82  SECOND    EPISTLE    TO    THE    CORINTHIANS. 

To  establish  a  conformity  between  this  passage  and  the 
history,  nothing  more  is  necessary  to  be  presumed  than 
that  St.  Paul  proceeded  from  Ephesus  to  Macedonia, 
upon  the  same  course  by  which  he  came  back  from  Ma- 
cedonia to  Ephesus,  or  rather  to  Miletus,  in  the  neighbor- 
hood of  Ephesus  ;  in  other  words,  that,  in  his  journey  to 
the  peninsula  of  Greece,  he  went  and  returned  the  same 
way.  St.  Paul  is  now  in  Macedonia,  where  he  had 
lately  arrived  from  Ephesus.  Ouv  quotation  imports  that 
in  his  journey  he  had  stopped  at  Troas.  Of  this  the  his- 
tory says  nothing,  leaving  us  only  the  short  account,  that 
"  Paul  departed  from  Ephesus  for  to  go  into  Macedonia." 
But  the  history  says  that,  in  his  return  from  Macedonia 
to  Ephesus,  "  Paul  sailed  from  Philippi  to  Troas ;  and  that, 
when  the  disciples  came  together  on  the  first  day  of  the 
week  to  break  bread,  Paul  preached  unto  them  all  night ; 
that  from  Troas  he  went  by  land  to  Assos ;  from  Assos, 
taking  ship  and  coasting  along  the  front  of  Asia  Minor, 
he  came  by  Mitylene  to  Miletus."  Which  account  proves, 
first,  that  Troas  lay  in  the  way  by  which  St.  Paul  passed 
between  Ephesus  and  Macedonia ;  secondly,  that  he  had 
disciples  there.  In  one  journey  between  these  two 
places,  the  epistle,  and,  in  another  journey  between  the 
same  places,  the  history,  makes  him  stop  at  this  city.  Of 
the  first  journey  he  is  made  to  say  "  that  a  door  was  in 
that  city  opened  unto  me  of  the  Lord  ;"  in  the  second, 
we  find  disciples  there  collected  around  him,  and  the 
apostle  exercising  his  ministry  with  what  was  even  in 
him  more  than  ordinary  zeal  and  labor.  The  epistle, 
therefore,  is  in  this  instance  confirmed,  if  not  by  the 
terms,  at  least  by  the  probability  of  the  history  ;  a 
species  of  confirmation  by  no  means  to  be  despised,  be- 
cause, as  far  as  it  reaches,  it  is  evidently  uncontrived. 
Grotius,  I  know,  refers  the  arrival  at  Troas,  to  which 


SECOND    EPISTLE    TO    THE    CORINTHIANS.  83 

the  epistle  alludes,  to  a  different  period,  but  I  think  very 
improbably ;  for  nothing  appears  .to  me  more  certain  than 
that  the  meeting  with  Titus,  which  St.  Paul  expected  at 
Troas,  was  the  same  meeting  which  took  place  in  Mace- 
donia, viz.  upon  Titus's  coming  out  of  Greece.  In  the 
quotation  before  us  he  tells  the  Corinthians,  "When  I 
came  to  Troas,  I  had  no  rest  in  my  spirit,  because  I  found 
not  Titus  my  brother ;  but,  taking  my  leave  of  them,  I 
went  from  thence  into  Macedonia."  Then  in  the  seventh 
chapter  he  writes,  "  When  we  were  come  into  Mace- 
donia, our  flesh  had  no  rest,  but  we  were  troubled  on 
every  side ;  without  were  fightings,  within  were  fears  ; 
nevertheless  God,  that  comforteth  them  that  are  cast 
down,  comforted  us  by  the  coming  of  Titus.''  These 
two  passages  plainly  relate  to  the  same  journey  of  Titus, 
in  meeting  with  whom  St.  Paul  had  been  disappointed 
at  Troas,  and  rejoiced  in  Macedonia.  And,  amongst 
other  reasons  which  fix  the  former  passage  to  the  coming 
of  Titus  out  of  Greece,  is  the  consideration  that  it  was 
nothing  to  the  Corinthians  that  St.  Paul  did  not  meet  with 
Titus  at  Troas,  were  it  not  that  he  was  to  bring  intelli- 
gence from  Corinth.  The  mention  of  the  disappointment 
in  this  place,  upon  any  other  supposition,  is  irrelative. 


No.  IX. 

Chap.  xi.  24,  25.  "  Of  the  Jews  five  times  received  I 
forty  stripes  save  one ;  thrice  was  I  beaten  with  rods ; 
once  was  I  stoned  ;  thrice  I  suffered  shipwreck ;  a  night 
and  a  day  I  have  been  in  the  deep." 

These  particulars  cannot  be  extracted  out  of  the  Acts 
of  the  Apostles  ;  which  proves,  as  hath  been  already  ob- 
served, that  the  epistle  was  not  framed  from  the  history ; 


84  SECOND    EPISTLE    TO    THE    CORINTHIANS. 

yet  they  are  consistent  with  it,  which,  considering  how 
numerically  circumstantial  the  account  is,  is  more  than 
could  happen  to  arbitrary  and  independent  fictions. 
When  I  say  that  these  particulars  are  consistent  with  the 
history,  I  mean,  first,  that  there  is  no  article  in  the  enu- 
meration which  is  contradicted  by  the  history :  secondly, 
that  the  history,  though  silent  with  respect  to  many  of  the 
facts  here  enumerated,  has  left  space  for  the  existence  of 
these  facts,  consistent  with  the  fidelity  of  its  own  narra- 
tion. 

First,  No  contradiction  is  discoverable  between  the 
epistle  and  the  history.  When  St.  Paul  says,  thrice  was 
I  beaten  with  rods;  although  the  history  record  only  one 
beating  with  rods,  viz.  at  Philippi,  Acts,  xvi.  22,  yet  is 
there  no  contradiction.  It  is  only  the  omission  in  one 
book  of  what  is  related  in  another.  But,  had  the  history 
contained  accounts  of  four  beatings  with  rods,  at  the 
time  of  writing  this  epistle,  in  which  St.  Paul  says  that 
he  had  only  suffered  three,  there  would  have  been  a  con- 
tradiction properly  so  called.  The  same  observation  ap- 
plies generally  to  the  other  parts  of  the  enumeration,  con- 
cerning which  the  history  is  silent:  but  there  is  one 
clause  in  the  quotation  particularly  deserving  of  remark; 
because,  when  confronted  with  the  history,  it  furnishes 
the  nearest  approach  to  a  contradiction,  without  a  con- 
tradiction being  actually  incurred,  of  any  I  remember  to 
have  met  with.  "  Once,"  saith  St.  Paul,  "  was  I  stoned." 
Does  the  history  relate  that  St.  Paul,  prior  to  the  writing 
of  this  epistle,  had  been  stoned  more  than  once  ?  The 
history  mentions  distinctly  one  occasion  upon  which  St. 
Paul  was  stoned,  viz.  at  Lystra  in  Lycaonia.  "Then 
came  thither  certain  Jews  from  Antioch  and  Iconium, 
who  persuaded  the  people  ;  and,  having  stoned  Paul, 
drew  him  out  of  the  city,  supposing  he  had  been  dead:" 


SECOND    EPISTLE    TO    THE    CORINTHIANS.  85 

cnap.  xiv.  19.  And  it  mentions  also  another  occasion  in 
which  "  an  assault  was  made  both  of  the  Gentiles,  and 
also  of  the  Jews  with  their  rulers,  to  use  them  despite- 
fully  and  to  stone  them  ;  but  they  were  aware  of  it," 
the  history  proceeds  to  tells  us,  "and  fled  into  Lystraand 
Derbe."  This  happened  at  Iconium,  prior  to  the  date  of 
the  epistle.  Now,  had  the  assault  been  completed  ;  had 
the  history  related  that  a  stone  was  thrown,  as  it  relates 
that  preparations  were  made  both  by  Jews  and  Gentiles 
to  stone  Paul  and  his  companions  ;  or  even  had  the  ac- 
count of  this  transaction  stopped,  without  going  on  to  in- 
form us  that  Paul  and  his  companions  were  "  aware  of 
their  danger  and  fled,"  a  contradiction  between  the  his- 
tory and  the  epistle  would  have  ensued.  Truth  is  neces- 
sarily consistent ;  but  it  is  scarcely  possible  that  inde- 
pendent accounts,  not  having  truth  to  guide  them,  should 
thus  advance  to  the  very  brink  of  contradiction  without 
falling  into  it. 

Secondly,  I  say  that,  if  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  be 
silent  concerning  many  of  the  instances  enumerated  in 
the  epistle,  this  silence  may  be  accounted  for,  from  the 
plan  and  fabric  of  the  history.  The  date  of  the  epistle 
synchronizes  with  the  beginning  of  the  twentieth  chapter 
of  the  Acts.  The  part,  therefore,  of  the  history,  which 
precedes  the  twentieth  chapter,  is  the  only  part  in  which 
can  be  found  any  notice  of  the  persecutions  to  which  St. 
Paul  refers.  Now  it  does  not  appear  that  the  author  of 
the  history  was  with  St.  Paul  until  his  departure  from 
Troas,  on  his  way  to  Macedonia,  as  related  chap.  xvi.  10; 
or  rather  indeed  the  contrary  appears.  It  is  in  this  point 
of  the  history  that  the  language  changes.  In  the  seventh 
and  eighth  verses  of  this  chapter  the  third  person  is  used. 
"After  they  were  come  to  Mysia,  they  assayed  to  go  into 
Bithynia,  but  the  Spirit  suffered  them  not;  and  they  pass- 


86  SECOND    EPISTLE    TO    THE    CORINTHIANS. 

ing  by  Mysia  came  to  Troas :"  and  the  third  person  is  in 
like  manner  constantly  used  throughout  the  foregoing 
part  of  the  history.  In  the  tenth  verse  of  this  chapter, 
the  first  person  comes  in :  "  After  Paul  had  seen  the 
vision,  immediately  we  endeavored  to  go  into  Macedo- 
nia :  assuredly  gathering  that  the  Lord  had  called  us 
to  preach  the  Gospel  unto  them."  Now,  from  this  time 
to  the  writing  of  the  epistle,  the  history  occupies  four 
chapters ;  yet  it  is  in  these,  if  in  any,  that  a  regular  or 
continued  account  of  the  apostle's  life  is  to  be  expected  : 
for  how  succinctly  his  history  is  delivered  in  the  pre- 
ceding part  of  the  book,  that  is  to  say,  from  the  time  of 
his  conversion  to  the  time  when  the  historian  joined  him 
at  Troas,  except  the  particulars  of  his  conversion  itself, 
which  are  related  circumstantially,  may  be  understood 
from  the  following  observations : — 

The  history  of  a  period  of  sixteen  years  is  comprised 
in  less  than  three  chapters ;  and  of  these  a  material  part 
is  taken  up  with  discourses.  After  his  conversion  he 
continued  in  the  neighborhood  of  Damascus,  according 
to  the  history,  for  a  -certain  considerable,  though  indefi- 
nite, length  of  time,  according  to  his  own  words  (Gal.  i. 
18,)  for  three  years  ;  of  which  no  other  account  is  given 
than  this  short  one,  that  "straightway  he  preached  Christ 
in  the  synagogues,  that  he  is  the  Son  of  God ;  that  all 
that  heard  him  were  amazed,  and  said,  Is  not  this  he  that 
destroyed  them  which  called  on  this  name  in  Jerusalem  ? 
that  he  increased  the  more  in  strength,  and  confounded 
the  Jews  which  dwelt  at  Damascus :  and  that,  after  many 
days  were  fulfilled,  the  Jews  took  counsel  to  kill  him." 
From  Damascus  he  proceeded  to  Jerusalem  :  and  of  his 
residence  there  nothing  more  particular  is  recorded  than 
that  "  he  was  with  the  apostles,  coming  in  and  going  out ; 
that  he  spake  boldly  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  and 


SECOND    EPISTLE    TO    THE    CORINTHIANS.  87 

disputed  against  the  Grecians,  who  went  about  to  kill 
him."  From  Jerusalem,  the  history  sends  him  to  his  na- 
tive city  of  Tarsus.*  It  seems  probable,  from  the  order 
and  disposition  of  the  history,  that  St.  Paul's  stay  at 
Tarsus  was  of  some  continuance  ;  for  we  hear  nothing  of 
him  until,  after  a  long  apparent  interval,  and  much  inter- 
jacent narrative,  Barnabas,  desirous  of  Paul's  assistance 
upon  the  enlargement  of  the  Christian  mission,  went  to 
Tarsus  "  for  to  seek  him."f  We  cannot  doubt  but  that 
the  new  apostle  had  been  busied  in  his  ministry  ;  yet  of 
what  he  did,  or  what  he  suffered,  during  this  period, 
which  may  include  three  or  four  years,  the  history  pro- 
fesses not  to  deliver  any  information.  As  Tarsus  was 
situated  upon  the  sea-coast,  and  as,  though  Tarsus  was 
his  home,  yet  it  is  probable  he  visited  from  thence  many 
other  places*  for  the  purpose  of  preaching  the  Gospel,  it  is 
not  unlikely  that,  in  the  course  of  three  or  four  years, 
he  might  undertake  many  short  voyages  to  neighboring 
countries,  in  the  navigating  of  which  we  may  be  allowed 
to  suppose  that  some  of  those  disasters  and  shipwrecks 
befell  him  to  which  he  refers  in  the  quotation  before  us, 
"  thrice  I  suffered  shipwreck,  a  night  and  a  day  I  have 
been  in  the  deep."  This  last  clause  I  am  inclined  to  in- 
terpret of  his  being  obliged  to  take  to  an  open  boat,  upon 
the  loss  of  the  ship,  and  his  continuing  out  at  sea  in  that 
dangerous  situation  a  night  and  a  day.  St.  Paul  is  here 
recounting  his  sufferings,  not  relating  miracles.  From 
Tarsus,  Barnabas  brought  Paul  to  Antioch,  and  there  he 
remained  a  year  :  but  of  the  transactions  of  that  year  no 
other  description  is  given  than  what  is  contained  in  the 
last  four  verses  of  the  eleventh  chapter.  After  a  more 
solemn  dedication  to  the  ministry,  Barnabas  and  Paul 
proceeded  from  Antioch  to  Cilicia,  and  from  thence  they 
*  Acts,  chap,  ix.,  30.  f  Chap.  xi..  25. 


88  SECOND    EPISTLE    TO    THE    CORINTHIANS. 

sailed  to  Cyprus,  of  which  voyage  no  particulars  are 
mentioned.  Upon  their  return  from  Cyprus,  they  made  a 
progress  together  through  the  Lesser  Asia ;  and,  though 
two  remarkable  speeches  be  preserved,  and  a  few  inci- 
dents in  the  course  of  their  travels  circumstantially  re- 
lated, yet  is  the  account  of  this  progress,  upon  the  whole, 
given  professedly  with  conciseness :  for  instance,  at  Ico- 
nium,  it  is  said  that  they  abode  a  long  time  ;*  yet  of  this 
long  abode,  except  concerning  the  manner  in  which  they 
were  driven  away,  no  memoir  is  inserted  in  the  history. 
The  whole  is  wrapped  up  in  one  short  summary,  "  They 
spake  boldly  in  the  Lord,  which  gave  testimony  unto  the 
word  of  his  grace,  and  granted  signs  and  wonders  to  be 
done  by  their  hands."  Having  completed  their  progress, 
the  two  apostles  returned  to  Antioch,  "  and  there  they 
abode  long  time  with  the  disciples."  Here  we  have  an- 
other large  portion  of  time  passed  over  in  silence.  To 
this  succeeded  a  journey  to  Jerusalem,  upon  a  dispute 
which  then  much  agitated  the  Christian  church,  concern- 
ing the  obligation  of  the  law  of  Moses.  When  the  object 
of  that  journey  was  completed,  Paul  proposed  to  Barna- 
bas to  go  again  and  visit  their  brethren  in  every  city 
where  they  had  preached  the  word  of  the  Lord.  The 
execution  of  this  plan  carried  our  apostle  through  Syria, 
Cilicia,  and  many  provinces  of  the  Lesser  Asia  ;  yet  is  the 
account  of  the  whole  journey  dispatched  in  four  verses 
of  the  sixteenth  chapter. 

If  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  had  undertaken  to  exhibit 
regular  annals  of  St.  Paul's  ministry,  or  even  any  con- 
tinued account  of  his  life,  from  his  conversion  at  Damas- 
cus to  his  imprisonment  at  Rome,  I  should  have  thought 
the  omission  of  the  circumstances  referred  to  in  our  epis- 
tle a  matter  of  reasonable  objection.     But  when  it  ap- 

*  Acts,  chap,  xiv.,  3. 


SECOND    EPISTLE    TO    THE    CORINTHIANS. 


89 


pears,  from  the  history  itself,  that  large  portions  of  St. 
I  aul'a  life  were  either  passed  over  in  silence,  or  only 
slightly  touched  upon,  and  that  nothing  more  than  certain 
detached  incidents  and  discourses  is  related ;  when  we 
observe,  also,  that  the  author  of  the  history  did  not  join 
our  apostle's  society  till  a  few  years  before  the  writing 
of  the  epistle,  at  least  that  there  is  no  proof  in  the  history 
that  he  did  so ;  in  comparing  the  history  with  the  epistle 
we  shall  not  be  surprised  by  the  discovery  of  omissions ' 
we  shall  ascribe  it  to  truth  that  there  is  no  contradiction 


No.  X. 

Chap.  iii.  1.  "Do  we  begin  again  to  commend  our- 
selves? or  need  we,  as  some  others,  epistles  of  commen- 
dation to  you?" 

"As  some  others."     Turn  to  Acts,  xviii.  27,  and  you 
will  find  that,  a  short  time  before  the  writing  of  this  epistle, 
Apollos  had  gone  to  Corinth  with  letters  of  commenda- 
tion from  the  Ephesian  Christians:  "And,  when  Apollos 
was  disposed  to  pass  into  Achaia,  the  brethren  wrote,  ex- 
horting the  disciples  to  receive  him."     Here  the  words 
of  the  epistle  bear  the  appearance  of  alluding  to  some 
specific  instance,  and  the  history  supplies  that  instance  ; 
it  supplies,. at  least,  an  instance  as  apposite  as  possible 
to  the  terms  which  the  apostle  uses,  and  to  the  date  and 
direction  of  the  epistle  in  which  they  are  found.     The 
letter  which   Apollos  carried    from    Ephesus  was   pre- 
cisely the  letter  of  commendation  which  St.  Paul  meant  • 
and  it  was  to  Achaia,  of  which  Corinth  was  the  capital, 
and  indeed  to  Corinth  itself,  (Acts,  chap.  xix.   1),  that 
Apollos  carried  it ;  and  it  was  about  two  years  before  the 
writing  of  this  epistle.      If  St.  Paul's  words  be  rather 


90  SECOND    EPISTLE    TO    THE    CORINTHIANS. 

thought  to  refer  to  some  general  usage  which  then  ob- 
tained among  Christian  churches,  the  case  of  Apollos  ex- 
emplifies that  usage  ;  and  affords  that  species  of  confirma- 
tion to  the  epistle  which  arises  from  seeing  the  manners 
of  the  age  in  which  it  purports  to  be  written  faithfully  pre- 
served. 


No.  XI. 

Chap.  xiii.  1.     "This  is  the  third  time  I  am  coming  to 

VOU  j"   TQttOV  TI3T0   f^OjMfctt. 

Do  not  these  words  import  that  the  writer  had  been  at 
Corinth  twice  before?  Yet,  if  they  import  this,  they 
overset  every  congruity  we  have  been  endeavoring  to 
establish.  The  Acts  of  the  Apostles  record  only  two 
journeys  of  St.  Paul  to  Corinth.  We  have  all  along  sup- 
posed, what  every  mark  of  time  except  this  expression 
indicates,  that  this  epistle  was  written  between  the  first 
and  second  of  these  journeys.  If  St.  Paul  had  been  al- 
ready twice  at  Corinth,  this  supposition  must  be  given 
up ;  and  every  argument  or  observation  which  depends 
upon  it  falls  to  the  ground.  Again,  the  Acts  of  the  Apos- 
tles not  only  record  no  more  than  two  journeys  of  St. 
Paul  to  Corinth,  but  do  not  allow  us  to  suppose  that  more 
than  two  such. journeys  could  be  made  or  intended  by 
him  within  the  period  which  the  history  comprises ;  for, 
from  his  first  journey  into  Greece  to  his  first  imprisonment 
at  Rome,  with  which  the  history  concludes,  the  apostle's 
time  is  accounted  for.  If,  therefore,  the  epistle  was  writ- 
ten after  the  second  journey  to  Corinth,  and  upon  the 
view  and  expectation  of  a  third,  it  must  have  been  written 
after  his  first  imprisonment  at  Rome ;  z.  c.  after  the  time 
to  which  the  history  extends.     When.  I  first  read  over 


SECOND    EPISTLE    TO    Till'.    COUI  NTH!  A  NS.  91 

this  epistle  with  the  particular  view  of  comparing  it  with 
the  history,  which  J  chose  to  do  without  consulting  any 
commentary  whatever,  I  own  that  I  felt  myself  con- 
founded by  this  text.  It  appeared  to  contradict  the  opin- 
ion, which  I  had  been  led  by  a  great  variety  of  circum- 
stances to  form,  concerning  the  date  and  occasion  of  the 
epistle.  At  length,  however,  it  occurred  to  my  thoughts 
to  inquire  whether  the  passage  did  necessarily  imply  that 
St.  Paul  had  been  at  Corinth  twice  ;  or  whether,  when 
he  says,  "this  is  the  third  time  I  am  coming  to  you,"  he 
might  mean  only  that  this  was  the  third  time  that  he  was 
ready,  that  he  was  prepared,  that  he  intended,  to  set  out 
upon  his  journey  to  Corinth.  I  recollected  that  he  had 
once  before  this  purposed  to  visit  Corinth,  and  had  been 
disappointed  in  this  purpose  ;  which  disappointment  forms 
the  subject  of  much  apology  and  protestation  in  the  first 
and  second  chapters  of  the  epistle.  Now,  if  the  journey 
in  which  he  had  been  disappointed  was  reckoned  by  him 
one  of  the  times  in  which  "  he  was  coming  to  them,"  then 
the  present  would  be  the  third  time,  i.  e.  of  his  being 
ready  and  prepared  to  come ;  although  he  had  been  act- 
ually at  Corinth  only  once  before.  This  conjecture  being 
taken  up,  a  farther  examination  of  the  passage  and  the 
epistle  produced  proofs  which  placed  it  beyond  doubt. 
"  This  is  the  third  time  I  am  coming  to  you  :"  in  the  verse 
following  these  words,  he  adds,  "  I  told  you  before,  and 
foretell  you.  as  if  I  were  present  the  s.roiul  lime  ;  and,  be- 
ing absent,  now  I  write  to  them  which  heretofore  have 
sinned,  and  to  all  other,  that,  if  I  come  again,  I  will  not 
spare."  In  this  verse  the  apostle  is  declaring  beforehand 
what  he  would  do  in  his  intended  visit:  his  expression 
therefore,  "as  if  I  were  present  the  second  time,"  relates 
to  that  visit.  But,  if  his  future  visit  would  only  make 
bim  present  among  them  a  second  time,  it  follows  that  he 


92  SECOND    EPISTLE    TO    THE    CORINTHIANS. 

had  been  already  there  but  once.  Again,  in  the  fifteenth 
verse  of  the  first  chapter,  he  tells  them,  "  In  this  confi- 
dence, I  was  minded  to  come  unto  you  before,  that  ye 
might  have  a  second  benefit."  Why  a  second,  and  not  a 
third,  benefit?  Why  deuzFgav,  and  not  TQ^r,*,  x<*Q"',  if  the 
iqnov  £Qx°iUtti  in  the  fifteenth  chapter  meant  a  third  visit  ? 
For,  though  the  visit  in  the  first  chapter  be  that  visit  in 
which  he  was  disappointed,  yet,  as  it  is  evident  from  the 
epistle  that  he  had  never  been  at  Corinth  from  the  time 
of  the  disappointment  to  the  time  of  writing  the  epistle,  it 
follows  that,  if  it  was  only  a  second  visit  in  which  he  was 
disappointed,  then  it  could  only  be  a  second  visit  which 
he  proposed  now.  But  the  text  which  I  think  is  decisive 
of  the  question,  if  any  question  remain  upon  the  subject, 
is  the  fourteenth  verse  of  the  twelfth  chapter:  "Behold, 
the  third  time  I  am  ready  to  come  to  you ;"  iSu  xqnoy 
EToiftwg  eyw  eldeiv.  It  is  very  clear  that  the  lynov  swiuuj; 
sxo)  eldsiv  of  the  twelfth  chapter,  and  the  iq^ov  x«ro  egx0!"0" 
of  the  thirteenth  chapter,  are  equivalent  expressions,  were 
intended  to  convey  the  same  meaning,  and  to  relate  to  the 
same  journey.  The  comparison  of  these  phrases  gives 
us  St.  Paul's  own  explanation  of  his  own  words;  and  it 
is  that  very  explanation  which  we  are  contending  for,  viz. 
that  TQiTov  7uto  eqx0^"1  does  not  mean  that  he  was  com- 
ing a  third  time,  but  that  this  was  the  third  time  he  was 
in  readiness  to  come,  T<)/ro»-  eroi/uag  ej*»»\  I  do  not  appre- 
hend that,  after  this,  it  can  be  necessary  to  call  to  our  aid 
the  reading  of  the  Alexandrian  manuscript,  which  gives 
eioi/uws  f^w  tldttv  in  the  thirteenth  chapter  as  well  as  in  the 
twelfth  ;  or  of  the  Syriac  and  Coptic  versions,  which  fol- 
low that  reading ;  because  I  allow  that  this  reading,  be- 
sides not  being  sufficiently  supported  by  ancient  copies, 
is  paraphrastical,  and  has  been  inserted  for  the  purpose 
of  expressing  more  unequivocally  the  sense  which  the 


SECOND    EPISTLE    TO    THE    CORINTHIANS.  93 

shorter  expression  ignov  t»to  sq^ouui  was  supposed  to 
carry.  Upon  the  whole,  the  matter  is  sufficiently  cer- 
tain ;  nor  do  I  propose  it  as  a  new  interpretation  of  the 
text  which  contains  the  difficulty,  for  the  same  was  given 
by  Grotius  long  ago ;  but  I  thought  it  the  clearest  way  of 
explaining  the  subject,  to  describe  the  manner  in  which 
the  difficulty,  the  solution,  and  the  proofs  of  that  solution, 
successively  presented  themselves  to  my  inquiries.  Now, 
in  historical  researches,  a  reconciled  inconsistency  be- 
comes a  positive  argument.  First,  because  an  impostor 
generally  guards  against  the  appearance  of  inconsist- 
ency :  and  secondly,  because,  when  apparent  inconsist- 
encies are  found,  it  is  seldom  that  any  thing  but  truth 
renders  them  capable  of  reconciliation.  The  existence 
of  the  difficulty  proves  the  want  of  absence  of  that  cau- 
tion which/  usually  accompanies  the  consciousness  of 
fraud  ;  and  the  solution  proves  that  it  is  not  the  collusion 
of  fortuitous  propositions  which  we  have  to  deal  with, 
but  that  a  thread  of  truth  winds  through  the  whole,  which 
preserves  every  circumstance  in  its  place. 


No.   XII. 

Chap.  x.  14 — 16.  "  We  are  come  as  far  as  to  you  also, 
in  preaching  the  Gospel  of  Christ ;  not  boasting  of  things 
without  our  measure,  that  is,  of  other  men's  labors ;  but 
having  hope,  when  your  faith  is  increased,  that  we  shall 
be  enlarged  by  you  according  to  our  rule,  abundantly  to 
preach  the  Gospel  in  the  regions  beyond  you." 

This  quotation  affords  an  indirect,  and  therefore  un- 
suspicious, but  at  the  same  time  a  distinct  and  indubita- 
ble, recognition  of  the  truth  and  exactness  of  the  history. 
I  consider  it  to  be  implied,  by  the  words  of  the  quotation, 


94  SECOND    EPISTLE    TO    THE    CORINTHIANS. 

that  Corinth  was  the  extremity  of  St.  FauPs  travels  hith- 
erto. He  expresses  to  the  Corinthians  his  hope  that,  in 
some  future  visit,  he  might  "preach  the  Gospel  to  the  re- 
gions beyond  them  ;"  which  imports  that  he  had  not  hith- 
erto proceeded  "  beyond  them,"  but  that  Corinth  was  as 
yet  the  farthest  point  of  boundary  of  his  travels. — Now, 
how  is  St.  Paul's  first  journey  into  Europe,  which  was 
the  only  one  he  had  taken  before  the  writing  of  the 
epistle,  traced  out  in  the  history  ?  Sailing  from  Asia, 
he  landed  at  Philippi ;  from  Philippi,  traversing  the  east- 
ern coast  of  the  peninsula,  he  passed  through  Amphipolis 
and  Appolonia  to  Thessalonica ;  from  thence  through 
Berea  to  Athens,  and  from  Athens  to  Corinth,  where  he 
stopped ;  and  from  whence,  after  a  residence  of  a  year 
and  a  half,  he  sailed  back  into  Syria.  So  that  Corinth 
was  the  last  place  which  he  visited  in  the  peninsula :  was 
the  place  from  which  he  returned  into  Asia ;  and  was,  as 
such,  the  boundary  and  limit  of  his  progress.  He  could 
not  have  said  the  same  thing,  viz.  "  I  hope  hereafter  to 
visit  the  regions  beyond  you,"  in  an  epistle  to  the  Philip- 
pians,  or  in  an  epistle  to  the  Thessalonians,  inasmuch  as 
he  must  be  deemed  to  have  already  visited  the  regions  be- 
yond them,  having  proceeded  from  those  cities  to  other 
parts  of  Greece.  But  from  Corinth  he  returned  home ; 
every  part  therefore  beyond  that  city  might  probably  be 
said  as  it  is  said  in  the  passage  before  us,  to  be  unvisited. 
Yet  is  this  propriety  the  spontaneous  effect  of  truth,  and 
produced  without  meditation  or  design. 


CHAPTER  V. 

THE  EPISTLE  TO  THE  GALATIANS. 

No.    I. 

The  argument  of  this  epistle,  in  some  measure,  proves 
its  antiquity.  It  will  hardly  be  doubted  but  that  it  was 
written  whilst  the  dispute  concerning  the  circumcision  of 
Gentile  converts  was  fresh  in  men's  minds  ;.  for,  even 
supposing  it  to  have  been  a  forgery,  the  only  credible 
motive  that  can  be  assigned  for  the  forgery  was  to  bring 
the  name  and  authority  of  the  apostle  into  this  contro- 
versy. No  design  could  be  so  insipid,  or  so  unlikely  to 
enter  into  the  thoughts  of  any  man,  as  to  produce  an 
epistle  written  earnestly  and  pointedly  upon  one  side  of 
a  controversy,  when  the  controversy  itself  was  dead,  and 
the  question  no  longer  interesting  to  any  description  of 
readers  whatever.  Now  the  controversy  concerning  the 
circumcision  of  the  Gentile  Christians  was  of  such  a  na- 
ture that,  if  it  rose  at  all,  it  must  have  arisen  in  the  be- 
ginning of  Christianity.  As  Judea  was  the  scene  of  the 
Christian  history  ;  as  the  Author  and  preachers  of  Chris- 
tianity were  Jews  ;  as  the  religion  itself  acknowledged,  and 
was  founded  upon,  the  Jewish  religion,  in  contradistinc- 
tion to  every  other  religion  then  professed  amongst  man- 
kind, it  was  not  to  be  wondered  at  that  some  of  its  teach- 
ers should  carry  it  out  in  the  world  rather  as  a  sect  and 
modification  of  Judaism  than  as  a  separate  original  rev- 
elation ;   or   that  they  should  invite  their  proselytes  to 


96  THE    B3MSTLE    TO    TEIE    GALATIANS. 

those  observances  in  which  they  lived  themselves.  This 
was  likely  to  happen:  but  if  it  did  not  happen  atjirst; 
if,  whilst  the  religion  was  in  the  hands  of  Jewish  teach- 
ers, no  such  claim  was  advanced,  no  such  condition  was 
attempted  to  be  imposed,  it  is  not  probable  that  the  doc- 
trine would  be  started,  much  less  that  it  should  prevail, 
in  any  future  period.  I  likewise  think  that  those  preten- 
sions of  Judaism  were  much  more  likely  to  be  insisted 
upon  whilst  the  Jews  continued  a  nation  than  after  their 
fall  and  dispersion  :  whilst  Jerusalem  and  the  temple 
stood  than  after  the  destruction  brought  on  them  by  the 
Roman  arms,  the  fatal  cessation  of  the  sacrifice  and  the 
priesthood,  the  humiliating  loss  of  their  country,  and, 
with  it,  of  the  great  rites  and  symbols  of  their  institution. 
It  should  seem,  therefore,  from  the  nature  of  the  subject, 
and  the  situation  of  the  parties,  that  this  controversy  was 
carried  on  in  the  interval  between  the  preaching  of  Chris- 
tianity to  the  Gentiles  and  the  invasion  of  Titus ;  and 
that  our  present  epistle,  which  was  undoubtedly  intended 
to  bear  a  part  in  this  controversy,  must  be  referred  to 
the  same  period. 

But,  again,  the  epistle  supposes  that  certain  designing 
adherents  of  the  Jewish  law  had  crept  into  the  churches 
of  Galatia  ;  and  had  been  endeavoring,  and  but  too  suc- 
cessfully, to  persuade  the  Galatic  converts  that  they  had 
been  taught  the  new  religion  imperfectly,  and  at  second 
hand  ;  that  the  founder  of  their  church  himself  possessed 
only  an  inferior  and  deputed  commission,  the  seat  of  truth 
and  authority  being  in  the  apostles  and  elders  of  Jerusa- 
lem ;  moreover,  that,  whatever  he  might  profess  amongst 
them,  he  had  himself,  at  other  times  and  in  other  places, 
given  way  to  the  doctrine  of  circumcision.  The  epistle 
is  unintelligible  without  supposing  all  this.  Referring 
therefore  to  this,  as  to  what  had  actually  passed,  we  find 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    GALATIANS.  97 

St.  Paul  treating  so  unjust  an  attempt  to  undermine  his 
credit,  and  to  introduce  amongst  his  converts  a  doctrine 
which  he  had  universally  reprobated,  in  terms  of  great 
asperity  and  indignation.  And  in  order  to  refute  the  sus- 
picions which  had  been  raised  concerning  the  fidelity  of 
his  teaching,  as  well  as  to  assert  the  independency  and 
divine  original  of  his  mission,  we  find  him  appealing  to 
the  history  of  his  conversion,  to  his  conduct  under  it,  to 
the  manner  in  which  he  had  conferred  with  the  apostles 
when  he  met  with  them  at  Jerusalem :  alleging  that,  so 
far  was  his  doctrine  from  being  derived  from  them,  or 
they  from  exercising  any  superiority  over  him,  that  they 
had  simply  assented  to  what  he  had  already  preached 
amongst  the  Gentiles,  and  which  preaching  was  commu- 
nicated not  by  them  to  him,  but  by  himself  to  them  ;  that 
he  had  maintained  the  liberty  of  the  Gentile  church,  by 
opposing,  upon  one  occasion,  an  apostle  to  the  face,  when 
the  timidity  of  his  behavior  seemed  to  endanger  it ;  that 
from  the  first,  that  all  along,  that  to  that  hour,  he  had  con- 
stantly resisted  the  claims  of  Judaism ;  and  that  the  per- 
secutions which  he  daily  underwent,  at  the  hands,  or  by 
the  instigation  of,  the  Jews,  and  of  which  he  bore  in  his 
person  the  marks  and  scars,  might  have  been  avoided  by 
him  if  he  had  consented  to  employ  his  labors  in  bringing, 
through  the  medium  of  Christianity,  converts  over  to  the 
Jewish  institution,  for  then  H  would  the  offence  of  the 
cross  have  ceased."  Now  an  impostor,  who  had  forged 
the  epistle  for  the  purpose  of  producing  St.  Paul's  au- 
thority in  the  dispute,  which,  as  hath  been  observed,  is 
the  only  credible  motive  that  can  be  assigned  for  the  for- 
gery., might  have  made  the  apostle  deliver  his  opinion 
upon  the  subject  in  strong  and  decisive  terms,  or  naighl 
have  put  his  name  to  a  train  of  reasoning  and  argumen- 
tation upon  that  side  of  the  question  which  the  imposture- 


98  THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    GALATIANS. 

was  intended  to  recommend.  I  can  allow  the  possibility 
of  such  a  scheme  as  that.  But  for  a  writer,  with  this 
purpose  in  view,  to  feign  a  series  of  transactions  sup- 
posed to  have  passed  amongst  the  Christians  of  Galatia, 
and  then  to  counterfeit  expressions  of  anger  and  resent- 
ment excited  by  these  transactions  ;  to  make  the  apostle 
travel  back  into  his  own  history,  and  into  a  recital  of  va- 
rious passages  of  his  life,  some  indeed  directly,  but  others 
obliquely,  and  others  even  obscurely,  bearing  upon  the 
point  in  question ;  in  a  word,  to  substitute  narrative  for 
argument,  expostulation  and  complaint  for  dogmatic  po- 
sitions and  controversial  reasoning,  in  a  writing  properly 
controversial,  and  of  which  the  aim  and  design  was  to 
support  one  side  of  a  much-agitated  question — is  a  method 
so  intricate,  and  so  unlike  the  methods  pursued  by  all 
other  impostors,  as  to  require  very  flagrant  proofs  of  im- 
position to  induce  us  to  believe  it  to  be  one. 


No.   II. 

In  this  number  I  shall  endeavor  to  prove, 

1.  That  the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians,  and  the  Acts  of 
the  Apostles,  were  written  without  any  communication 
with  each  other. 

2.  That  the  epistle,  though  written  without  any  com- 
munication with  the  history,  by  recital,  implication,  or 
reference,  bears  testimony  to  many  of  the  facts  contained 
m  it. 

First,  the  epistle,  and  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  were 
written  without  any  communication  with  each  other. 

To  judge  of  this  point,  we  must  examine  those  passages, 
in  each,  which  describe  the  same  transaction  ;  for,  if  the 
author  of  either  writing  derived  his  information  from  the 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    GALATIANS.  99 

account  which  he  had  seen  in  the  other,  when  he  came 
to  speak  of  the  same  transaction,  he  would  follow  that 
account.  The  history  of  St.  Paul,  at  Damascus,  as  read 
in  the  Acts,  and  as  referred  to  by  the  epistle,  forms  an 
instance  of  this  sort.  According  to  the  Acts,  Paul  (after 
his  conversion)  was  certain  days  with  the  "  disciples 
which  were  at  Damascus.  And  straightway  he  preached 
Christ  in  the  synagogues,  that  he  is  the  Son  of  God. 
But  all  that  heard  him  were  amazed,  and  said,  Is  not  this 
he  which  destroyed  them  which  called  on  this  name  in 
Jerusalem,  and  came  hither  for  that  intent,  that  he  might 
bring  them  bound  unto  the  chief  priests  ?  But  Saul  in- 
creased the  more  in  strength,  confounding  the  Jews  which 
were  at  Damascus,  proving  that  this  is  very  Christ.  And, 
after  that  many  days  were  fulfilled,  the  Jews  took  counsel 
to  kill  him.  But  their  laying  wait  was  known  of  Saul ; 
and  they  watched  the  gates  day  and  night  to  kill  him. 
Then  the  disciples  took  him  by  night,  and  let  him  down 
by  the  wall  in  a  basket.  And,  when  Saul  was  come  to 
Jerusalem,  he  assayed  to  join  himself  to  the  disciples." 
Acts,  chap.  ix.  19 — 26. 

According  to  the  epistle,  "  When  it  pleased  God,  who 
separated  me  from  my  mother's  womb,  and  called  me  by 
his  grace,  to  reveal  his  own  Son  in  me,  that  I  might 
preach  him  among  the  heathen,  immediately  I  conferred 
not  with  flesh  and  blood,  neither  went  I  up  to  Jerusalem 
to  them  which  were  apostles  before  me  ;  but  I  went  into 
Arabia,  and  returned  again  to  Damascus  ;  then,  after 
three  years,  I  went  up  to  Jerusalem." 

Besides  the  difference  observable  in  the  terms  and  gen- 
eral complexion  of  these  two  accounts,  "  the  journey  into 
Arabia.''  mentioned  in  the  epistle,  and  omitted  in  the  his- 
tory, affords  full  proof  that  there  existed  no  correspond- 
ence between  these  writers.     If  the  narrative  in  the  Acts- 


100  THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    GALATIANS. 

had  been  made  up  from  the  epistle,  it  is  impossible  that 
this  journey  should  have  been  passed  over  in  silence  ;  if 
the  epistle  had  been  composed  out  of  what  the  author  had 
read  of  St.  Paul's  history  in  the  Acts,  it  is  unaccountable 
that  it  should  have  been  inserted.* 

The  journey  to  Jerusalem,  related  in  the  second  chap- 
ter of  the  epistle  ("  then,  fourteen  years  after,  I  went  up 
again  to  Jerusalem"),  supplies  another  example  of  the 
same  kind.  Either  this  was  the  journey  described  in  the 
fifteenth  chapter  of  the  Acts,  when  Paul  and  Barnabas 
were  sent  from  Antioch  to  Jerusalem,  to  consult  the  apos- 
tles and  elders  upon  the  question  of  the  Gentile  converts.; 
or  it  was  some  journey  of  which  the  history  does  not  take 
notice.  If  the  first  opinion  be  followed,  the  discrepancy 
in  the  two  accounts  is  so  considerable  that  it  is  not  with- 
out difficulty  they  can  be  adapted  to  the  same  transac- 
tion :  so  that,  upon  this  supposition,  there  is  no  place  for 
suspecting  that  the  writers  were  guided  or  assisted  by 
each  other.  If  the  latter  opinion  be  preferred,  we  have 
then  a  journey  to  Jerusalem,  and  a  conference  with  the 
principal  members  of  the  church  there,  circumstantially 
related  in  the  epistle,  and  entirely  omitted  in  the  Acts; 
and  we  are  at  liberty  to  repeat  the  observation,  which 
we  before  made,  that  the  omission  of  so  material  a  fact 
in  the  history  is  inexplicable,  if  the  historian  had  read  the 
epistle ;  and  that  the  insertion  of  it  in  the  epistle,  if  the 

*  N.B.  The  Acta  of  the  Apostles  simply  inform  us  that  St.  Paul  left  Da- 
mascus in  order  to  go  to  Jerusalem,  "  after  many  days  were  fulfilled."  If 
any  one  douht  whether  the  words  "  many  days"  could  be  intended  to  ex- 
press a  period  which  included  a  term  of  three  years,  he  will  find  a  complete 
instance  of  the  same  phrai  e  used  with  the  same  latitude  in  the  First  Book 
of  Kings,  chap.  xi.  38,  III) :  "  And  Shimei  dwelt  at  Jerusalem  many  days  ; 
and  it  came  to  pass,  at  the  end  of  (luxe  years,  that  two  of  the  servants  of 
Shimei  ran  awa,y." 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    GALATIANS.  101 

writer  derived  his  information  from  the  history,  is  not 
less  so. 

St.  Peter's  visit  to  Antioch,  during  which  the  dispute 
arose  between  him  and  St.  Paul,  is  not  mentioned  in  the 
Acts. 

If  we  connect  with  these  instances  the  general  obser- 
vation that  no  scrutiny  can  discover  the  smallest  trace  of 
transcription  or  imitation  either  in  things  or  words,  we 
shall  be  fully  satisfied  in  this  part  of  our  case  ;  namely,  that 
the  two  records,  be  the  facts  contained  in  them  true  or 
false,  come  to  our  hands  from  independent  sources. 

Secondly,  I  say  that  the  epistle,  thus  proved  to  have 
been  written  without  any  communication  with  the  his- 
tory, bears  testimony  to  a  great  variety  of  particulars 
contained  in  the  history. 

1.  St.  Paul  in  the  early  part  of  his  life  had  addicted 
himself  to  the  study  of  the  Jewish  religion,  and  was  dis- 
tinguished by  his  zeal  for  the  institution,  and  for  the  tra- 
ditions which  had  been  incorporated  with  it.  Upon  this 
part  of  his  character  the  history  makes  St.  Paul  speak 
thus:  "I  am  verily  a  man  which  am  a  Jew,  born  in  Tar- 
sus, a  city  of  Cilicia,  yet  brought  up  in  this  city  at  the  feet 
of  Gamaliel,  and  taught  according  to  the  perfect  manner 
of  the  law  of  the  fathers ;  and  was  zealous  towards  God, 
as  ye  all  are  this  day."     Acts:  chap.  xxii.  3. 

The  epistle  is  as  follows  :  "  I  profited  in  the  Jews'  relig- 
ion above  many  my  equals  in  mine  own  nation,  and  being 
more  exceedingly  zealous  of  the  traditions  of  my  fathers." 
Chap.  i.  14. 

2.  St.  Paul,  before  his  conversion,  had  been  a  fierce 
persecutor  of  the  new  sect.  "As  for  Saul,  he  made 
havoc  of  the  church  ;  entering  into  every  house,  and  haling 
men  and  women,  committed  them  to  prison."  Acts,  chap, 
viii.,  3. 


102  THE    EPrSTLE    TD    THE    GALATIAN&. 

This  is  the  history  of  St.  Paul,  as  delivered  in  the  Acts : 
in  the  recital  of  his  own  history  in  the  epistle,  "  Ye  have 
heard,"  says  he,  "  of  my  conversation  in  times  past  in  the 
Jews'  religion,  how  that  beyond  measure  I  persecuted 
the  church  of  God."     Chap.  i.  13. 

3.  St.  Paul  was  miraculously  converted  on  his  way  to 
Damascus.  "  And  as  he  journeyed  he  came  near  to  Da- 
mascus :  and  suddenly  there  shined  round  about  him  a 
light  from  heaven ;  and  he  fell  to  the  earth,  and  heard  a 
voice  saying  unto  him,  Saul,  Saul,  why  persecutest  thou 
me  ?  And  he  said,  Who  art  thou,  Lord  ?  And  the  Lord 
said,  I  am  Jesus,  whom  thou  persecutest ;  it  is  hard  for 
thee  to  kick  against  the  pricks.  And  he,  trembling  and 
astonished,  said,  Lord,  what  wilt  thou  have  me  to  do  ? 
Acts,  chap.  ix.  3 — 6.  With  these,  compare  the  epistle, 
chap.  i.  15 — 17.  "When  it  pleased  God,  who  separated 
me  from  my  mother's  womb,  and  called  me  by  his  grace, 
to  reveal  his  Son  in  me,  that  I  might  preach  him  among 
the  heathen ;  immediately  I  conferred  not  with  flesh  and 
blood,  neither  went  I  up  to  Jerusalem,  to  them  that  were 
apostles  before  me ;  but  I  went  into  Arabia,  and  returned 
again  unto  Damascus." 

In  this  quotation  from  the  epistle,  I  desire  to  be  re- 
marked how  incidentally  it  appears  that  the  affair  passed 
at  Damascus.  In  what  may  be  called  the  direct  part  of 
the  account,  no  mention  is  made  of  the  place  of  his  con- 
version at  all :  a  casual  expression  at  the  end,  and  an  ex- 
pression brought  in  for  a  different  purpose,  alone  fixes  it 
to  have  been  at  Damascus:  "I  returned  again  to  Da- 
mascus." Nothing  can  be  more  like  simplicity  and  unde- 
signerlness  than  this  is.  It  also  draws  the  agreement  be- 
tween the  two  quotations  somewhat  closer,  to  observe 
that  they  both  state  St.  Paul  to  have  preached  the  Gos- 
pel  immediately   upon    his   call:    ''And    straightway   he 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    GALATIAXS.  103 

preached  Christ  in  the  synagogues,  that  he  is  the  Son  of 
God."  Acts,  chap.  ix.  20.  "When  it  pleased  God  to 
reveal  his  Son  in  me,  that  I  might  preach  him  among  the 
heathen,  immediately  I  conferred  not  with  flesh  and  blood." 
Gal.,  chap.  i.  15. 

4.  The  course  of  the  apostle's  travels  after  his  conver- 
sion was  this  :  He  went  from  Damascus  to  Jerusalem, 
and  from  Jerusalem  into  Syria  and  Cilicia.  "At  Damas- 
cus the  disciples  took  him  by  night,  and  let  him  down  by 
the  wall  in  a  basket;  and  when  Saul  was  come  to  Jeru- 
salem, he  assayed  to  join  himself  to  the  disciples."  Acts, 
chap.  ix.  25.  Afterwards,  "  when  the  brethren  knew 
the  conspiracy  formed  against  him  at  Jerusalem,  they 
brought  him  down  to  Caisarea,  and  sent  him  forth  to  Tar- 
sus, a  city  in  Cilicia."  Chap.  ix.  30.  In  the  epistle,  St. 
Paul  gives  the  following  brief  account  of  hi,s  proceedings 
within  the  same  period  :  "  After  three  years  I  went  up  to 
Jerusalem  to  see  Peter,  and  abode  with  him  fifteen  days ; 
afterwards  I  came  into  the  regions  of  Syria  and  Cilicia." 
The  history  had  told  us  that  Paul  passed  from  Coesarea 
to  Tarsus  :  if  he  took  this  journey  by  land,  it  would  carry 
him  through  Syria  into  Cilicia;  and  he  would  come,  after 
his  visit  to  Jerusalem,  "into  the  regions  of  Syria  and 
Cilicia,"  in  the  very  order  in  which  he  mentions  them  in 
the  epistle.  This  supposition  of  his  going  from  Ca3sarea 
to  Tarsus,  by  land,  clears  up  also  another  point.  It  ac- 
counts for  what  St.  Paul  says  in  the  same  place  concern- 
ing the  churches  of  Judea :  "Afterwards  I  came  into  the 
regions  of  Syria  and  Cilicia,  and  was  unknown  by  face 
unto  the  churches  of  Judea  which  were  in  Christ:  but 
they  had  heard  only  that  he  which  persecuted  us  in  times 
past  now  preacheth  the  faith  which  once  he  destroyed  ; 
and  they  glorified  God  in  me."  Upon  which  passage  I 
observe,  first,  that  what  is  here  said  of  the  churches  of 


104  THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    GALATIANS. 

Judea  is  spoken  in  connection  with  his  journey  into  the 
regions  of  Syria  and  Cilicia.  Secondly,  that  the  passage 
itself  has  little  significancy,  and  that  the  connection  is  in- 
explicable, unless  St.  Paul  went  through  Judea*  (though 
probably  by  a  hasty  journey)  at  the  time  that  he  came 
into  the  regions  of  Syria  and  Cilicia.  Suppose  him  to 
have  passed  by  land  from  Ccesarea  to  Tarsus,  all  this,  as 
hath  been  observed,  would  be  precisely  true. 

5.  Barnabas  was  with  St.  Paul  at  Antioch.  "  Then 
departed  Barnabas  to  Tarsus,  for  to  seek  Saul ;  and,  when 
he  hud  found  him,  he  brought  him  unto  Antioch.  And  it 
came  to  pass,  that  a  whole  year  they  assembled  them- 
selves with  the  church."  Acts,  chap.  ix.  25,  26.  Again, 
and  upon  another  occasion,  "they  (Paul  and  Barnabas) 
sailed  to  Antioch :  and  there  they  continued  a  long  time 
with  the  disciples."     Chap.  xiv.  26. 

Now  what  says  the  epistle  ?  "  When  Peter  was  come 
to  Antioch,  I  withstood  him  to  the  face,  because  he  was 
to  be  blamed :  and  the  other  Jews  dissembled  likewise 
with  him  ;  insomuch  that  Barnabas  also  was  carried  away 
with  their  dissimulation."     Chap.  ii.  11,  13. 

G.  The  stated  residence  of  the  apostles  was  at  Jerusa- 
lem. "  At  that  time  there  was  a  great  persecution  against 
the  church  which  was  at  Jerusalem  ;  and  they  were  all 
scattered  abroad  throughout  the  regions  of  Judea  and 
Samaria,  except  the  apostles.  Acts,  chap.  viii.  1.  "  They 
(the  Christians-  at  Antioch)  determined  that  Paul  and 
Barnabas  should  go  up  to  Jerusalem,  unto  the  apostles 
and   <  Iders,  about  this   question."      Acts,  chapter  xv.   2. 

»  Dr    i>oJdricl!_rr  thought  thai  the  Ctcsarea.  here  mentioned  wa§  not  the 

■    1 1  city  of  that  name  upon  the  Mediterranean  Sea,  but  Caesarea 

Philipui,  near  the  borders  of  Syria,  which  lies  in  a  much  more  direct  line 
from  Jerusalem  to  Tarsus  than  th<  other.  The  objection  to  this,  Dr.  Ben- 
son  remarks,  is,  that  Cseaarea,  without  any  addition,  usually  denotes  Csesa- 
rea  Palestin   . 


THE    EPISTLE    TO     THE    GALATIAVS.  105 

With  these  accounts  agrees  the  declaration  in  the  epistle : 
"  Neither  went  I  up  to  Jerusalem  to  them  which  were 
apostles  before  me,"  chap.  i.  17  :  for  this  declaration  im- 
plies, or  rather  assumes  it  to  be  known,  that  Jerusalem 
was  the  place  where  the  apostles  were  to  be  met  with. 

7.  There  were  at  Jerusalem  two  apostles,  or  at  the 
least  two  eminent  members  of  the  church,  of  the  name  of 
James.  This  is  directly  inferred  from  the  Acts  of  the 
Apostles,  which  in  the  second  verse  of  the  twelfth  chap- 
ter relates  the  death  of  James,  the  brother  of  John  ;  and 
yet,  in  the  fifteenth  chapter,  and  in  a  subsequent  part  of 
the  history,  records  a  speech  delivered  by  James  in  the 
assembly  of  the  apostles  and  elders.  It  is  also  strongly 
implied  by  the  form  of  expression  used  in  the  epistle  : 
"  Other  apostles  saw  I  none,  save  James,  the  Lords 
brother;  ii/e.  to  distinguish  him  from  James  the  brother 
of  John. 

To  us  who  have  been  long  conversant  in  the  Christian 
history,  as  contained  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  these 
points  are  obvious  and  familiar ;  nor  do  we  really  appre- 
hend any  greater  difficulty  in  making  them  appear  in  a 
letter  purporting  to  have  been  written  by  St.  Paul,  than 
there  is  in  introducing  them  into  a  modern  sermon.  But, 
to  judge  correctly  of  the  argument  before  us,  we  must 
discharge  this  knowledge  from  our  thoughts.  We  must 
propose  to  ourselves  the  situation  of  an  author  who  sat 
down  to  the  writing  of  the  epistle  without  having  seen 
the  history  ;  and  then  the  concurrences  we  have  deduced 
will  be  deemed  of  importance.  They  will  at  least  be 
taken  for  separate  confirmations  of  the  several  facts,  and 
not  only  of  these  particular  facts,  but  of  the  general  truth 
of  the  history. 

For,  what  is  the  rule  with  respect  to  corroborative 
testimony  which  prevails  in  courts  of  justice,  and  which 

5- 


106 


THE    EriSTLE    TO    THE    GALATIAXS. 


prevails  only  because  experience  has  proved  that  it  is  a 
useful  guide  to  truth  I  A  principal  witness  in  a  cause 
delivers  his  account:  his  narrative,  in  certain  parts  of  it, 
is  confirmed  by  witnesses  who  are  called  afterwards. 
The  credit  derived  from  their  testimony  belongs  not  only 
to  the  particular  circumstances  in  which  the  auxiliary 
witnesses  agree  with  the  principal  witness,  but  in  some 
measure  to  the  whole  of  his  evidence ;  because  it  is  im- 
probable that  accident  or  fiction  should  draw  a  line 
which  touched  upon  truth  in  so  many  points. 

In  like  manner,  if  two  records  be  produced,  manifestly 
independent,  that  is,  manifestly  written  without  any  par- 
ticipation of  intelligence,  an  agreement  between  them, 
even  in  few  and  slight  circumstances,  (especially  if,  from 
the  different  nature  and  design  of  the  writings,  few  points 
only  of  agreement,  and  those  incidental,  could  be  ex- 
pected to  occur),  would  add  a  sensible  weight  to  the  au- 
thority of  both,  in  every  part  of  their  contents. 

The  same  rule  is  applicable  to  history,  with  at  least  as 
much  reason  as  any  other  species  of  evidence. 


No.  III. 

But,  although  the  references  to  various  particulars  in 
the  epistle,  compared  with  the  direct  account  of  the  same 
particulars  in  the  history,  afford  a  considerable  proof  of 
the  truth,  not  only  of  these  particulars  but  of  the  narra- 
tive which  contains  them;  yet  they  do  not  show,  it  will 
be  said,  that  the  epistle  was  written  by  St.  Paul :  for.  ad- 
mitting (what  seems  to  have  been  proved)  that  the  writer, 
whoever  he  was,  had  no  recourse  to  the  Acts  of  the  Apos- 
tles, yet  many  of  the  facts  referred  to,  such  as  St.  Paul's 


THE    El'ISTLE    TO    THE    GALATIANS.  107 

miraculous  conversion,  his  change  from  a  virulent  perse- 
cutor to  an  indefatigable  preacher,  his  labors  amongst 
the  Gentiles,  and  his  zeal  for  the  liberties  of  the  Gentile 
church,  were  so  notorious  as  to  occur  readily  to  the  mind 
of  any  Christian  who  should  choose  to  personate  his  char- 
acter, and  counterfeit  his  name  ;  it  was  only  to  write 
what  every-body  knew.  Now  I  think  that  this  supposi- 
tion— viz.  that  the  epistle  was  composed  upon  general  in- 
formation, and  the  general  publicity  of  the  facts  alluded 
to,  and  that  the  author  did  no  more  than  weave  into  his 
work  what  the  common  fame  of  the  Christian  church  had 
reported  to  his  ears — is  repelled  by  the  particularity  of 
the  recitals  and  references.  This  particularity  is  ob- 
servable in  the  following  instances  ;  in  perusing  which,  I 
desire  the  reader  to  reflect,  whether  they  exhibit  the 
language  of  a  man  who  had  nothing  but  general  reputa- 
tion to  proceed  upon,  or  of  a  man  actually  speaking  of 
himself  and  of  his  own  history,  and  consequently  of  things 
concerning  which  he  possessed  a  clear,  intimate,  and  cir- 
cumstantial knowledge. 

1.  The  history,  in  giving  an  account  of  St.  Paul  after 
his  conversion,  relates  "  that,  after  many  days,"  effecting, 
by  the  assistance  of  the  disciples,  his  escape  from  Damas- 
cus, **  he  proceeded  to  Jerusalem."  Acts,  chap.  ix.  25. 
The  epistle,  speaking  of  the  same  period,  makes  St.  Paul 
say  that  "  he  went  into  Arabia,"  that  he  returned  again 
to  Damascus,  that  after  three  years  he  went  up  to  Jeru- 
salem.    Chap.  i.  17, 18. 

2.  The  history  relates  that,  when  Saul  was  come  from 
Damascus,  "  he  was  with  the  disciples  coming  in  and  go- 
ing out."  Acts,  ehap.  ix.  28.  The  epistle,  describing  the 
same  journey,  tells  us  "that  he  went  up  to  Jerusalem  to 
see  Peter,  and  abode  with  him  fifteen  days."'     Chap.  i.  18. 

3.  The  history  relates  that,  when   Paul  was  come  to 


108  THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    GALATIANS. 

Jerusalem,  "Barnabas  took  him  and  brought  him  to  the 
apostles."  Acts,  chap.  ix.  27.  The  epistle,  "  that  he 
saw  Peter ;  but  other  of  the  apostles  saw  he  none,  save 
James,  the  Lord's  brother."     Chap.  i.  19. 

Now  this  is  as  it  should  be.  The  historian  delivers  his 
account  in  general  terms,  as  of  facts  to  which  he  was  not 
present.  The  person  who  is  the  subject  of  that  account, 
when  he  comes  to  speak  of  these  facts  himself,  particu- 
larizes time,  names,  and  circumstances. 

4.  The  like  notation  of  places,  persons,  and  dates,  is 
met  with  in  the  account  of  St.  Paul's  journey  to  Jerusa- 
lem, given  in  the  second  chapter  of  the  epistle.  It  was 
fourteen  years  after  his  conversion ;  it  was  in  company 
with  Barnabas  and  Titus ;  it  was  then  that  he  met  with 
James,  Cephas,  and  John  ;  it  was  then  also  that  it  was 
agreed  amongst  them  that  they  should  go  to  the  circum- 
cision, and  he  unto  the  Gentiles. 

5.  The  dispute  with  Peter,  which  occupies  the  sequel 
of  the  second  chapter,  is  marked  with  the  same  particu- 
larity. It  was  at  Antioch ;  it  was  after  certain  came 
from  James ;  it  was  whilst  Barnabas  was  there,  who  was 
carried  away  by  their  dissimulation.  These  examples 
negative  the  insinuation  that  the  epistle  presents  nothing 
but  indefinite  allusions  to  public  facts. 


No.  IV. 

Chap.  iv.  11 — 1G.  "  I  am  afraid  of  you,  lest  I  have  be- 
stowed upon  you  labor  in  vain.  Brethren,  I  beseech  you, 
be  as  I  am,  for  I  am  as  ye  are.  Ye  have  not  injured  me 
at  all.  Ye  know  how,  through  the  infirmity  of  the  flesh,  I 
preached  the  Gospel  unto  you  at  the  first ;  and  my  temp- 
tation, which  was  in  the  Jlesh,  ye   despised   not,  nor  re- 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    GALATIANS.  109 

jected ;  but  received  me  as  an  angel  of  God,  even  as 
Christ  Jesus.  Where  is  then  the  blessedness  you  spake 
of?  for  I  bear  you  record  that,  if  it  had  been  possible,  ye 
would  have  plucked  out  your  own  eyes,  and  have  given 
them  unto  me.  Am  I  therefore  become  your  enemy,  be- 
cause I  tell  you  the. truth?" 

With  this  passage  compare  2  Cor.  chap,  xii.,  1 — 9: 
"  It  is  not  expedient  for  me,  doubtless,  to  glory  ;  I  will 
come  to  visions  and  revelations  of  the  Lord.  I  knew  a 
man  in  Christ  above  fourteen  years  ago  (whether  in  the 
body  I  cannot  tell,  or  whether  out  of  the  body  I  cannot 
tell ;  God  knoweth) ;  such  a  one  was  caught  up  to  the 
third  heaven  ;  and  I  knew  such  a  man  (whether  in  the 
body  or  out  of  the  body  I  cannot  tell ;  God  knoweth), 
how  that  he  was  caught  up  into  Paradise,  and  heard  un- 
speakable .words,  which  it  is  not  lawful  for  a  man  to  utter. 
Of  such  a  one  will  I  glory,  yet  of  myself  will  I  not  glory, 
but  in  mine  infirmities :  for  though  I  would  desire  to 
glory,  I  shall  not  be  a  fool ;  for  I  will  say  the  truth.  But 
now  I  forbear,  lest  any  man  should  think  of  me  above 
that  which  he  seeth  me  to  be,  or  that  he  heareth  of  me. 
And,  lest  I  should  be  exalted  above  measure,  through 
the  abundance  of  the  revelations,  there  was  given  to  me 
a  thorn  in  the  flesh,  the  messenger  of  Satan  to  buffet  me, 
lest  I  should  be  exalted  above  measure.  For  this  thing 
I  besought  the  Lord  thrice,  that  it  might  depart  from  me. 
And  he  said  unto  me,  My  grace  is  sufficient  for  thee  ;  for 
my  strength  is  made  perfect  in  weakness.  Most  gladly 
therefore  will  I  rather  glory  in  my  infirmities,  that  the 
power  of  Christ  may  rest  upon  me." 

There  can  be  no  doubt  but  that  the  "  temptation  which 
was  in  the  flesh,"  mentioned  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Gala- 
tians,  and  "  the  thorn  in  the  flesh,  the  messenger  of  Sataa 
to  buffet  him,"  mentioned  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Corinthi- 


110  THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    GALATIANS. 

ans,  were  intended  to  denote  the  same  thing.  Either, 
therefore,  it  was,  what  we  pretend  it  to  have  been,  the 
same  person  in  both,  alluding,  as  the  occasion  led  him,  to 
some  bodily  infirmity  under  which  he  labored  ;  that  is, 
we  are  reading  the  real  letters  of  a  real  apostle ;  or  it 
was  that  a  sophist,  who  had  seen  the  circumstance  in  one 
epistle,  contrived,  for  the  sake  of  correspondency,  to  bring 
it  into  another ;  or,  lastly,  it  was  a  circumstance  in  St. 
Paul's  personal  condition,  supposed  to  be  well  known  to 
those  into  whose  hands  the  epistle  was  likely  to  fall ;  and, 
for  that  reason,  introduced  into  a  writing  designed  to 
bear  his  name.  I  have  extracted  the  quotations  at  length, 
in  order  to  enable  the  reader  to  judge  accurately  of  the 
manner  in  which  the  mention  of  this  particular  comes  in, 
in  each  ;  because  that  judgment,  I  think,  will  acquit  the 
author  of  the  epistle  of  the  charge  of  having  studiously 
inserted  it,  either  with  a  view  of  producing  an  apparent 
agreement  between  them,  or  for  any  other  purpose  what- 
ever. 

The  context  by  which  the  circumstance  before  lis  is 
introduced  is  in  two  places  totally  different,  and  without 
any  mark  of  imitation;  yet  in  both  places  does  the  cir- 
cumstance rise  aptly  and  naturally  out  of  the  context, 
and  that  context  from  the  train  of  thought  carried  on  in 
the  epistle. 

The  Epistle  to  the  Galatians,  from  the  beginning  to  the 
end,  runs  in  a  strain  of  angry  complaint  of  their  defection 
from  the  apostle,  and  from  the  principles  which  he  had 
taught  them.  It  was  very  natural  to  contrast  with  this 
conduct  the  zeal  with  which  they  had  once  received  him  ; 
and  it  was  not  less  so  to  mention,  as  a  proof  of  their  former 
disposition  towards  him,  the  indulgence  which,  whilst  he 
was  amongst  them,  the)'  had  shown  to  his  infirmity;  "My 
temptation  which  was  in  the  flesh  ye  despised  not  nor 


THE    EriSTLE    TO    THE    GALATIANS.  Ill 

rejected,  but  received  me  as  an  angel  of  God,  even  as 
Christ  Jesus.  Where  is  then  the  blessedness  ye  spake 
of,"  i.  e.  the  benedictions  which  you  bestowed  upon  me  ? 
"  for  I  bear  you  record  that,  if  it  had.  been  possible,  ye 
would  have  plucked,  out  your  own  eyes,  and  have  given 
them  to  me." 

In  the  two  epistles  to  the  Corinthians,  especially  in  the 
second,  we  have  the  apostle  contending  with  certain 
teachers  in  Corinth  who  had  formed  a  party  in  that  church 
against  him.  To  vindicate  his  personal  authority,  as 
well  as  the  dignity  and  credit  of  his  ministry  amongst 
them,  he  takes  occasion  (but  not  without  apologizing  re- 
peatedly for  the  folly,  that  is,  for  the  indecorum,  of  pro- 
nouncing his  own  panegyric)*  to  meet  his  adversaries 
in  their  boastings  :  "  Whereinsoever  any  is  bold  (I  speak 
foolishly)  I  am  bold  also.  Are  they  Hebrews  ?  so  am  I. 
Are  they  Israelites  ?  so  am  I.  Are  they  the  seed  of 
Abraham  ?  so  am  I.  Are  they  the  ministers  of  Christ  ? 
I  speak  as  a  fool, — I  am  more  ;  in  labors  more  abundant, 
in  stripes  above  measure,  in  prisons  more  frequent,  in 
deaths  oft."  Being  led  to  the  subject,  he  goes  on,  as  was 
natural,  to  recount  his  trials  and  dangers,  his  incessant 
cares  and  labors  in  the  Christian  mission.  From  the 
proofs  which  he  had  given  of  his  zeal  and  activity  in  the 
service  of  Christ,  he  passes  (and  that  with  the  same 
view  of  establishing  his  claim  to  be  considered  as  "  not  a 
whit  behind  the  very  chiefest  of  the  apostles")  to  the 
visions  and  revelations  which  from  time  to  time  had  been 
vouchsafed  to  him.     And  then,  by  a  close  and  easy  con- 

*  "  Would  to  God  you  would  bear  with  me  a  little  in  my  folly,  and  indeed 
bear  with  me  !"     Chap.  xi.  1. 

"  That  which  I  speak,  I  speak  it  not  after  the  Lord,  but  as  it  were  fool- 
ishly, in  this  confidence  of  boasting."     Chap.  xi.  17. 

"  I  am  become  a  fool  in  glorying,  ye  have  comp  lied  me."     Chap.  xii.  11. 


112  THE      ETISTLE    TO    THE    GALATIANS. 

nection,  comes  in  the  mention  of  his  infirmity  :  l:  Lest  1 
should  be  exalted,"  says  he,  "above  measure,  through  the 
abundance  of  revelations,  there  was  given  to  me  a  thorn 
in  the  flesh,  the  messenger  of  Satan  to  buffet  me." 

Thus,  then,  in  both  epistles,  the  notice  of  his  infirmity 
is  suited  to  the  place  in  which  it  is  found.  In  the  Epistle 
to  the  Corinthians,  the  train  of  thought  draws  up  to  the 
circumstance  by  a  regular  approximation.  In  this  epis- 
tle, it  is  suggested  by  the  subject  and  occasion  of  the  epis- 
tle itself.  Which  observation  we  offer  as  an  argument 
to  prove  that  it  is  not,  in  either  epistle,  a  circumstance 
industriously  brought  forward  for  the  sake  of  procuring 
credit  to  an  imposture. 

A  reader  will  be  taught  to  perceive  the  force  of  this 
argument,  who  shall  attempt  to  introduce  a  given  circum- 
stance into  the  body  of  a  writing.  To  do  this  without 
abruptness,  or  without  betraying  marks  of  design  in  the 
transition,  requires,  he  will  find,  more  art  than  he  ex- 
pected to  be  necessary,  certainly  more  than  any  one  can 
believe  to  have  been  exercised  in  the  composition  of 
these  epistles. 


No.  V. 

Chap.  iv.  29.  "  But  as  then  he  that  was  born  after 
the  flesh  persecuted  him  that  was  born  after  the  Spirit, 
even  so  it  is  now." 

Chap.  v.  11.  "And  I,  brethren,  if  I  yet  preach  cir- 
cumcision, why  do  I  yet  suffer  persecution?  Then  is  the 
offence  of  the  cross  ceased." 

Chap.  vi.  17.  "From  henceforth,  let  no  man  trouble 
me,  for  I  bear  in  my  body  the  marks  of  the  Lord  Jesus." 

From  these  several  texts  it  is  apparent  that  the  perse- 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    GALATIAN8.  113 

cutions  which  our  apostle  had  undergone  were  from  the 
hands,  or  by  the  instigation,  of  the  Jews;  that  it  was  not 
for  preaching  Christianity  in  opposition  to  heathenism, 
but  it  was  for  preaching  it  as  distinct  from  Judaism,  that 
he  had  brought  upon  himself  the  sufferings  which  had  at- 
tended his  ministry.  And  this  representation  perfectly 
coincides  with  that  which  results  from  the  detail  of  St. 
Paul's  history,  as  delivered  in  the  Acts.  At  Antioch,  in 
Pisidia,  "the  word  of  the  Lord  was  published  throughout 
all  the  region ;  but  the  Jews  stirred  up  the  devout  and 
honorable  women  and  the  chief  men  of  the  city,  and 
raised  persecution  against  Paul  and  Barnabas,  and  expel- 
led them  out  of  their  coasts" — Acts,  chap.  xiii.  50.  Not 
long  after,  at  Iconium,  "a  great  multitude  of  the  Jews 
and  also  of  the  Greeks  believed,  but  the  unbelieving  Jews 
stirred  up  the  Gentiles,  and  made  their  minds  evil  affect- 
ed against  the  brethren."  Chap.  xiv.  1,  2.  ''At  Lystra 
there  came  certain  Jews  from  Antioch  and  Iconium,  who 
persuaded  the  people  ;  and,  having  stoned  Paul  drew  him 
out  of  the  city,  supposing  he  had  been  dead."  Chap.  xiv. 
19.  The  same  enmity,  and  from  the  same  quarter,  our 
apostle  experienced  in  Greece  :  "At  Thessalonica,  some 
of  them  (the  Jews)  believed,  and  consorted  with  Paul  and 
Silas:  and  of  the  devout  Greeks  a  great  multitude,  and 
of  the  chief  women  not  a  few:  but  the  Jews  which  be- 
lieved not,  moved  with  envy,  topk  unto  them  certain  lewd 
fellows  of  the  basert  sort,  and  gathered  a  company,  and 
set  all  the  city  in  an  uproar,  and  assaulted  the  house  of 
Jason,  and  sought  to  bring  them  out  to  the  people."  Acts, 
chap.  xvii.  4,  5.  Their  persecutors  follow  them  to  Berea  : 
"When  the  Jews  of  Thessalonica  had  knowledge  that  the 
word  of  God  was  preached  of  Paul  at  Berea,  they  came 
thither  also,  and  stirred  up  the  people."  Chap.  xvii.  13. 
And  lastly  at  Corinth,  when  Gallio  was  deputy  of  Achaia, 


114  THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    GALATIANS. 

"  the  Jews  made  insurrection  with  one  accord  against 
Paul,  and  brought  him  to  the  judgment  sea."  I  think  it 
does  not  appear  that  our  apostle  was  ever  set  upon  by 
the  Gentiles,  unless  they  were  first  stirred  up  by  the 
Jews,  except  in  two  instances ;  in  both  which  the  persons 
who  began  the  assault  were  immediately  interested  in  his 
expulsion  from  the  place.  Once  this  happened  at  Phi- 
lippi,  after  the  cure  of  the  Pythoness :  "  When  the  mas- 
ters saw  the  hope  of  their  gains  was  gone,  they  caught 
Paul  and  Silas,  and  drew  them  into  the  market-place 
unto  the  rulers."  Chap.  xvi.  19.  And  a  second  time  at 
Ephesus,  at  the  instance  of  Demetrius,  a  silversmith, 
which  made  silver  shrines  for  Diana,  "  who  called  to- 
gether workmen  of  like  occupation,  and  said,  Sirs,  ye 
know  that  by  this  craft  we  have  our  wealth  ;  moreover  ye 
see  and  hear  that  not  only  at  Ephesus,  but  almost  through- 
out all  Asia,  this  Paul  hath  persuaded  away  much  people, 
saying  that  they  be  no  gods  which  are  made  with  hands ; 
so  that  not  only  this  craft  is  in  danger  to  be  set  at  nought, 
but  also  that  the  temple  of  the  great  goddess  Diana 
should  be  despised,  and  her  magnificence  should  be  de- 
stroyed, whom  all  Asia  and  the  world  worshippeth." 


No.  VI. 

I  observe  an  agreement  in  a  somewhat  peculiar  rule  of 
Christian  conduct,  as  laid  down  in  this  epistle,  and  as  ex- 
emplified in  the  Second  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians.  It  is 
not  the  repetition  of  the  same  general  precept,  which 
would  have  been  a  coincidence  of  little  value;  but  it  is 
the  general  precept  in  one  place,  and  the  application  of 
that  precept  to  an  actual  occurrence  in  the  other.  In  the 
sixth  chapter  and  first  verse  of  this  epistle,  our  apostle 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    GAEATIANS.  115 

gives  the  following  direction:  "Brethren,  if  a  man  be 
overtaken  in  a  fault,  ye,  which  are  spiritual,  restore  such 
a  one  in  the  spirit  of  meekness."  In  2  Cor.,  chap.  ii. 
G — 8,  he  writes  thus :  "  Sufficient  to  such  a  man"  (the  in- 
cestuous person  mentioned  in  the  First  Epistle)  "  is.  this 
punishment,  which  was  inflicted  of  many  :  so  that,  con- 
trariwise, ye  ought  rather  to  forgive  him  and  comfort 
him,  lest,  perhaps,  such  a  one  should  be  swallowed  up 
with  over-much  sorrow :  wherefore  I  beseech  you  that 
ye  would  confirm  your  love  towards  him."  I  have  little 
doubt  but  that  it  was  the  same  mind  which  dictated  these 
two  passages. 


No.   VII. 

Our  epistle  goes  farther  than  any  of  St.  Paul's  epistles; 
for  it  avows,  in  direct  terms,  the  supersession  of  the  Jew- 
ish law,  as  an  instrument  of  salvation,  even  to  the  Jews 
themselves.  Not  only  were  the  Gentiles  exempt  from 
its  authority,  but  even  the  Jews  were  no  longer  either  to 
place  any  dependency  upon  it,  or  consider  themselves  as 
subject  to  it  on  a  religious  account.  "  Before  faith  came, 
we  were  kept  under  the  law,  shut  up  unto  the  faith  which 
should  afterwards  be  revealed  ;  wherefore  the  law  was 
our  schoolmaster  to  bring  us  unto  Christ,  that  we  mieht 
be  justified  by  faith ;  but,  after  that  faith  is  come,  we  are 
no  longer  under  a  schoolmaster."  Chap.  iii.  23 — 25. 
This  was  undoubtedly  spoken  of  Jews,  and  to  Jews.  In 
like  manner,  chap.  iv.  1—5.  -'Now,  I  say  that  the  heir, 
as  long  as  he  is  a  child,  differeth  nothing  from  a  servant, 
though  he  be  lord  of  all ;  but  is  under  tutors  and  gov- 
ernors until  the  time  appointed  of  the  father :  even  so  we, 
when  we  were  children,  were  in  bondage  under  the  ele- 


116  THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    GALATIANS. 

ments  of  the  world ;  but,  when  the  fulness  of  time  was 
come,  God  sent  forth  his  Son,  made  of  a  woman,  made 
under  the  law,  to  redeem  them  that  were  under  the  law, 
that  we  might  receive  the  adoption  of  sons."  These  pas- 
sages are  nothing  short  of  a  declaration  that  the  obliga- 
tion of  the  Jewish  law,  considered  as  a  religious  dispen- 
sation, the  effects  of  which  were  to  take  place  in  another 
life,  had  ceased,  with  respect  even  to  the  Jews  them- 
selves. What  then  should  be  the  conduct  of  a  Jew  (for 
such  St.  Paul  was)  who  preached  this  doctrine?  To  be 
consistent  with  himself,  either  he  would  no  longer  comply, 
in  his  own  person,  with  the  directions  of  the  law  ;  or,  if 
he  did  comply,  it  would  be  for  some  other  reason  than 
an}*  confidence  which  he  placed  in  its  efficacy  as  a  relig- 
ious institution.  Now,  so  it  happens  that,  whenever  St. 
Paul's  compliance  with  the  Jewish  law  is  mentioned  in 
the  history,  it  is  mentioned  in  connection  with  circum- 
stances which  point  out  the  motive  from  which  it  pro- 
ceeded ;  and  this  motive  appears  to  have  been  always 
exoteric,  namely,  a  love  of  order  and  tranquillity,  or  an 
unwillingness  to  give  unnecessary  offence.  Thus,  Acts, 
chap.  xvi.  ?,,  "Him  (Timothy)  would  Paul  have  to  go 
forth  with  him,  and  took  and  circumcised  him  because  of 
/he  Jews  which  were  in  those  quarters."  Again,  Acts, 
chap.  xxi.  26,  when  Paul  consented  to  exhibit  an  exam- 
ple of  public  compliance  of  a  Jewish  rite  by  purifying 
himself  in  the  temple,  it  is  plainly  intimated  that  he  did 
this  to  satisfy  "marry  thousands  of  Jews  who  believed, 
and  who  were  all  zealous  of  the  law."  So  far  the  in- 
stances related  in  one  book  correspond  with  the  doctrine 
delivered  in  another. 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    GALATIANS.  117 

No.    VIII. 

Chap.  i.  18.     "  Then,  after  three  years,  I  went  up  to 
Jerusalem  to  see  Peter,  and  abode  with  him  fifteen  days." 

The  shortness  of  St.  Paul's  stay  at  Jerusalem  is  what  I 
desire  the  reader  to  remark.     The  direct  account  of  the 
same  journey  in  the  Acts,  chap.  ix.  28,  determines  no- 
thing concerning  the  time  of  his  continuance  there  :  "  And 
he  was  with  them  (the  apostles)  coming  in,  and  going 
out,  at  Jerusalem  ;  and  he   spake  boldly  in  the  name  of 
the  Lord  Jesus,  and  disputed  against  the  Grecians :  but 
they  went  about  to  slay  him  ;  which,  when  the  brethren 
knew,  they  brought  him  down  to  Caesarea."     Or  rather, 
this  account,  taken  by  itself,  would  lead  a  reader  to  sup- 
pose that  St,  Paul's  abode  at  Jerusalem  had  been  longer 
than  fifteen  days.     But  turn  to  the  twenty-second  chap- 
ter of  the  Acts,  and  you  will  find  a  reference  to  this  visit 
to  Jerusalem,  which  plainly  indicates  that  Paul's  contin- 
uance in  that  city  had  been  of  short  duration :  "  And  it 
came  to  pass  that,  when  I  was  come  again  to  Jerusalem, 
even  while  I  prayed  in  the  temple,  I  was  in  a  trance,  and 
saw  him  saying  unto  me,  Make  haste,  get  thee  quickly  out 
of  Jerusalem,  for  they  will  not  receive  thy  testimony  con- 
cerning me."     Here  we  have  the  genera]  terms  of  one 
text  so  explained  by  a  distant  ,text  in  the  same  book  as 
to  bring  an  indeterminate  expression  into  a  close   con- 
formity with  a  specification  delivered  in  another  book ;  a 
species  of  consistency  not,  I  think,  usually  found  in  fabu- 
lous relations. 

No.  IX. 

Chap.  vi.  11.     «  Ye  see  how  large  a  letter  I  have  writ- 
ten unto  you  with  mine  own  hand." 


118  THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    GALATIANS. 

These  words  imply  that  he  did  not  always  write  with 
his  own  hand ;  which  is  consonant  to  what  we  find  inti- 
mated in  some  other  of  the  epistles.  The  Epistle  to  the 
Romans  was  written  by  Tertius :  "  I,  Tertius,  who  wrote 
this  epistle,  salute,  you  in  the  Lord."  Chap.  xvi.  22. 
The  First  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  the  Epistle  to  the  Co- 
lossians,  and  the  Second  to  the  Thessalonians,  have  all, 
near  the  conclusion,  this  clause,  "  The  salutation  of  me, 
Paul,  with  mine  own  hand ;"  which  must  be  understood, 
and  is  universally  understood,  to  import  that  the  rest  of  the 
epistle  was  written  by  another  hand.  I  do  not  think  it 
improbable  that  an  impostor,  who  had  remarked  this  sub- 
scription in  some  other  epistle,  should  invent  the  same  in  a 
forgery ;  but  that  is  not  done  here.  The  author  of  this  epis- 
tle does  not  imitate  the  manner  of  giving  St.  Paul's  signa- 
ture ;  he  only  bids  the  Galatians  observe  how  large  a  let- 
ter he  had  written  to  them  with  his  own  hand.  He  does 
not  say  this  was  different  from  his  ordinary  usage ;  that 
is  left  to  implication.  Now,  to  suppose  that  this  was  an 
artifice  to  procure  credit  to  an  imposture,  is  to  suppose 
that  the  author  of  the  forgery,  because  he  knew  that 
others  of  St.  Paul's  were  not  written  by  himself,  there- 
fore made  the  apostle  say  that  this  was  :  which  seems  an 
odd  turn  to  give  to  the  circumstance,  and  to  be  given  for 
a  purpose  which  would  more  naturally  and  more  directly 
have  been  answered  by  subjoining  the  salutation  or  signa- 
ture in  the  form  in  which  it  is  found  in  other  epistles.* 

*  The  words  mXiKois  y^mjiaav  may  probably  be  meant  to  describe  the 
character  in  which  he  wrote,  and  not  the  length  ot"  the  letter.  But  this 
will  not  alter  the  truth  of  our  observation.  I  think,  however,  that,  as  St. 
Paul,  by  the  mention  of  his  own  hand,  designed  to  express  to  the  Galatians 
the  great  concern  which  he  felt  for  them,'  the  words,  whatever  they  signify, 
belong  to  the  whole  of  the  epistle ;  and  not,  as  Grolius  after  St.  Jerome,  in- 
terprets it,  to  the  few  verses  which  follow. 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    GALATIANS.  119 


No.  X. 

An  exact  conformity  appears  in  the  manner  in  which 
a  certain  apostle  or  eminent  Christian,  whose  name  was 
James,  is  spoken  of  in  the  epistle  and  in  the  history.  Both 
writings  refer  to  a  situation  of  his  at  Jerusalem,  some- 
what different  from  that  of  the  other  apostles  ;  a  kind  of 
eminence  or  presidency  in  the  church  there,  or  at  least 
a  more  fixed  and  stationary  residence.  Chap.  ii.  12. 
"When  Peter  was  at  Antioch,  before  that  certain  came 
from  James,  he  did  eat  with  the  Gentiles."  This  text 
plainly  attributes  a  kind  of  pre-eminency  to  James ;  and, 
as  we  hear  of  him  twice  in  the  same  epistle  dwelling  at 
Jerusalem,  chap.  i.  19,  and  ii.  9,  we  must  apply  it  to'  the 
situation  which  he  held  in  that  church.  In  the  Acts  of 
the  Apostles  divers  intimations  occur,  conveying  the  same 
idea  of  James's  situation.  When  Peter  was  miraculously 
delivered  from  prison,  and  had  surprised  his  friends  by 
his  appearance  among  them,  after  declaring  unto  them 
how  the  Lord  had  brought  him  out  of  prison ;  "  Go, 
show,"  says  he,  "  these  things  unto  James,  and  to  the 
brethren."  Acts,  chap.  xii.  17.  Here  James  is  mani- 
festly spoken  of  in  terms  of  distinction.  He  appears 
again  with  like  distinction  in  the  twenty-first  chapter  and 
the  seventeenth  and  eighteenth  verses :  "  And  when  we 
(Paul  and  his  company)  were  come  to  Jerusalem,  the  day 
following,  Paul  went  in  with  us  unto  James,  and  all  the 
elders  were  present."  In  the  debate  which  took  place 
upon  the  business  of  the  Gentile  converts,  in  the  council 
at  Jerusalem,  this  same  person  seems  to  have  taken  the 
lead.  It  was  he  who  closed  the  debate,  and  proposed 
the  resolution  in  which  the  council  ultimately  concurred: 


120  THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    GAI.ATIANS. 

"Wherefore   my  sentence  is,  that  we  trouble  not  them 
which  from  among  the  Gentiles  are  turned  to  God." 

Upon  the  whole,  that  there  exists  a  conformity  in  the 
expressions  used  concerning  James,  throughout  the  his- 
tory, and  in  the  epistle,  is  unquestionable.  But,  admitting 
this  conformity,  and  admitting  also  the  undesignedness 
of  it,  what  does  it  prove?  It  proves  that  the  circum- 
stance itself  is  founded  in  truth  ;  that  is,  that  James  was  a 
real  person,  who  held  a  situation  of  eminence  in  a  real 
society  of  Christians  at  Jerusalem.  It  confirms  also  those 
parts  of  the  narrative  which  are  connected  with  this  cir- 
cumstance. Suppose,  for  instance,  the  truth  of  the  ac- 
count of  Peter's  escape  from  prison  was  to  be  tried  upon 
the  testimony  of  a  witness,  who,  among  other  things, 
made  Peter,  after  his  deliverance,  say,  "Go,  show  these 
things  to  James,  and  to  the  brethren  ;"  would  it  not  be 
material,  in  such  a  trial,  to  make  out  by  other  indepen- 
dent proofs,  or  by  a  comparison  of  proofs,  drawn  irom 
independent  sources,  that  there  was  actually  at  that  time, 
living  at  Jerusalem,  such  a  person  as  James;  that  this 
person  held  such  a  situation,  in  the  society  amongst  whom 
these  things  were  transacted,  as  to  render  the  words 
which  Peter  is  said  l>  have  used  concerning  him  proper 
and  natural  for  him  to  have  used?  If  this  would  be  per- 
tinent in  the  discussion  of  oral  testimony,  it  is  still  more 
so  in  nppiteciating  the  credit  of  remote  history. 

1;  nusl  not  be  dissembled  that  the  comparison  of  our 
epist.e  with  the  history  presents  some  difficulties,  or,  to 
say  the  least,  some  questions  of  considerable  magnitude. 
It  may  he  doubted,  in  the  first  place,  to  what  journey  the 
words  which  open  the  second  chapter  of  the  epistle,  "  then, 
join  !s  afterward!,  1  went  unto  Jerusalem,"  relate. 

That  which  best  correspond^  with  the  date,  and  that  to 
which  most  interpreters  apply  the  passage, is  the  journey 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    GAfcATIANS.  121 

of  Paul  and  Barnabas  to  Jerusalem,  when  thev  went 
thither  from  Antioch,  upon  the  business  of  the  Gentile 
converts;  and  which  journey  produced  the  famous  coun- 
cil and  decree  recorded  in  the  fifteenth  chapter  of  Acts. 
To  me  this  opinion  appears  to  be  encumbered  with  strong 
objections.  In  the  epistle,  Paul  tells  us  that  "he  went  up 
by  revelation."  Chap.  ii.  2. — In  the  Acts,  we  read  that 
he  was  sent  by  the  church  of  Antioch :  "  After  no  small 
dissension  and  disputation,  they  determined  that  Paul  and 
Barnabas,  and  certain  other  of  them,  should  go  up  to  the 
apostles  and  elders  about  this  question.'*  Acts,  chap.  xv. 
2.  This  is  not  very  reconcileable.  In  the  epistle,  St. 
Paul  writes  that,  when  he  came  to  Jerusalem,  "he  com- 
municated that  Gospel  which  he  preached  among  the 
Gentiles,  but  privately  to  them  which  were  of  reputation." 
Chap.  ii.  2<  If  by  ;i  that  Gospel"  ha  meant  the  immunity 
of  the  Gentile  Christians  from  the  Jewish  law  (and  I  know 
not  what  else  it  can  mean),  it  is  not  easy  to  conceive  how 
he  should  communicate  that  privately  which  was  the  ob- 
ject of  his  public  message.  But  a  yet  greater  difficulty 
remains,  viz.  that,  in  the  account  which  the  epistle  gives 
of  what  passed  upon  this  visit  at  Jerusalem,  no  notice  is 
taken  of  the  deliberation  and  decree  which  are  recorded 
in  the  Acts,  and  which,  according  to  that  history,  formed 
the  business  for  the  sake  of  which  the  journey  was  under- 
taken. The  mention  of  the  council  and  of  its  determina- 
tion, whilst  the  apostle  was  relating  his  proceedings  at 
Jerusalem,  could  hardly  have  been  avoided,  if  in  "truth 
the  narrative  belong  to  the  same  journey.  To  me  it  ap- 
pears more  probable  that  Paul  and  Barnabas  had  taken 
some  journey  to  Jerusalem,  the  mention  of  which  is 
omitted  in  the  Acts.  Prior  to  the  apostolic  decree,  we 
read  that  "Paul  and  Barnabas  abode  at  Antioch  a  long 
time  with  the  disciples.     Ads,  chap.   >:iv.  28.     Is  it  un- 

6 


122  THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    GALATIANS. 

likely  that,  during  this  long  abode,  they  might  go  up  to 
Jerusalem  and  return  to  Antioch?  Or  would  the  omis- 
sion of  such  a  journey  be  unsuitable  to  the  general  brevity 
with  which  these  memoirs  are  written,  especially  of  those 
parts  of  St.  Paul's  history  which  took  place  before  the 
historian  joined  his  society? 

But,  again,  the  first  account  we  find,  in  the  Acts  of  the 
Apostles,  of  St.  Paul's  visiting  Galatia,  is  in  the  sixteenth 
chapter  and  the  sixth  verse :  "  Now,  when  they  had  gone 
through  Phrygia  and  the  region  of  Galatia,  they  assayed 
to  go  into  Bithynia."  The  progress  here  recorded  was 
subsequent  to  the  apostolic  decree  ;  therefore  that  decree 
must  have  been  extant  when  our  epistle  was  written. 
Now,  as  the  professed  design  of  the  epistle  was  to  estab- 
lish the  exemption  of  the  Gentile  converts  from  the  law 
of  Moses,  and  as  the  decree  pronounced  and  confirmed 
that  exemption,  it  may  seem  extraordinary  that  no  notice 
whatever  is  taken  of  that  determination,  nor  any  appeal 
made  to  its  authority.  Much  however  of  the  weight  of 
this  objection,  which  applies  also  to  some  other  of  St. 
Paul's  epistles,  is  removed  by  the  following  reflections. 

1.  It  was  not  St.  Paul's  manner,  nor  agreeable  to  it, 
to  resort  or  defer  much  to  the  authority  of  the  other 
apostles,  especially  whilst  he  was  insisting,  as  he  does 
strenuously  throughout  this  epistle  insist,  upon  his  own 
original  inspiration.  He  who  could  speak  of  the  very 
chiefest  of  the  apostles  in  such  terms  as  the  following — 
"of  those  who  seemed  to  be  somewhat,  whatsoever  they 
were,  it  maketh  no  matter  to  me ;  God  accepteth  no 
man's  person ;  for  they  who  seemed  to  be  somewhat  in 
conference  added  nothing  to  me" — he,  I  say,  was  not 
likely  to  support  himself  by  their  decision. 

2.  The  epistle  argues  the  point  upon  principle ;  and  it 
is  not  perhaps  more  to  be  wondered  at,  that  in  such  an 


THE    KPISTLE    TO    THE    GALAT1ANS.  123 

argument  St.  Paul  should  not  cite  the  apostolic  decree, 
than  it  would  be  that,  in  a  discourse  designed  to  prove 
the  moral  and  religious  duty  of  observing  the  Sabbath, 
the  writer  should  not  quote  the  thirteenth  canon. 

3.  The  decree  did  not  go  the  length  of  the  position 
maintained  in  the  epistle;  the  decree  only  declares  that 
the  apostles  and  elders  at  Jerusalem  did  not  impose  the 
observance  of  the  Mosaic  law  upon  the  Gentile  converts, 
as  a  condition  of  their  being  admitted  into  the  Christian 
church.  Our  epistle  argues  that  the  Mosaic  institution 
itself  was  at  an  end,  as  to  all  effects  upon  a  future  state, 
even  with  respect  to  the  Jews  themselves. 

4.  They  whose  error.  St.  Paul  combated  were  not  per- 
sons who  submitted  to  the  Jewish  law  because  it  was  im- 
posed by  the  authority,  or  because  it   was  made  part  of 
the  law  of, the  Christian  church;  but  they  were  persons 
who,  having  already  become  Christians,  afterwards  vol- 
untarily took  upon  themselves  the  observance  of  the  Mo- 
saic code,  under  a  notion  of  attaining  thereby  to  a  greater 
perfection.     This,  I  think,  is  precisely  the  opinion  which 
St.  Paul  opposes  in  this  epistle.     Many  of  his  expressions 
apply  exactly  to  it:  "Are  ye  so  foolish?  having  begun 
in   the  Spirit,  are   ye  now  made  perfect  in  the  flesh  ?" 
Chap.  iii.  3.     "Tell  me.  ye  that  desire  to  be  under  the 
law,  do  ye   not  hear  the   law?"     Chap.  iv.  21.     '-How 
turn  ye  again  to  the  weak  and  beggarly  elements,  where- 
unto  ye  desire  again  to  be  in  bondage  ?"     Chap.  iv.  0.     It 
cannot  be  thought  extraordinary  that  St.  Paul  should  re- 
sist this  opinion  with  earnestness;  for  it  both  changed  the 
character  of  the  Christian  dispensation,  and   derogated 
expressly  from  the  completeness  of  that  redemption  which 
Jesus  Christ  had  wrought  for  them  that  believed  in  him. 
But  it  was  to  no  purpose  to  allege  to  such  persons  the 
decision  at  Jerusalem  :   for  that  only  showed  that  thev 


124  THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    GALATIANS. 

were  not  bound  to  these  observances  by  any  law  of  the 
Christian  church:  they  did  not  pretend  to  be  so  bound: 
nevertheless  they  imagined  that  there  was  an  efficacy  in 
these  observances,  a  merit,  a  recommendation  to  favor, 
and  a  ground  of  acceptance  with  God  for  those  who  com- 
plied with  them.  This  was  a  situation  of  thought  to 
which  the  tenor  of  the  decree  did  not  apply.  Accord- 
ingly St.  Paul's  address  to  the  Galatians,  which  is  through- 
out adapted  to  this  situation,  runs  in  a  strain  widely  differ- 
ent from  the-language  of  the  decree  :  "  Christ  is  become  of 
no  effect  unto  you,  whosoever  of  you  are  justified  by  the 
law,"  chap.  v.  4;  i,  e.  whosoever  places  his  dependence 
upon  any  merit  he  may  apprehend  there  to  be  in  legal 
observances.  The  decree  had  said  nothing  like  this  ; 
therefore  it  would  have  been  useless  to  have  produced 
the  decree  in  an  argument  of  which  this  was  the  burden. 
In  like  manner  as  in  contending  with  an  anchorite,  who 
should  insist  upon  the  superior  holiness  of  a  recluse, 
ascetic  life,  and  the  value  of  such  mortifications  in  the 
sight  of  God,  it  would  be  to  no  purpose  to  prove  that  the 
laws  of  the  church  did  not  require  these  vows,  or  even  to 
prove  that  the  laws  of  the  church  expressly  left  every 
Christian  to  his  liberty.  This  would  avail  little  towards 
abating  his  estimation  of  their  merit,  or  towards  settling 
the  point  in  controversy.* 

*  Mr.  Locke's  solution  of  this  difficulty  is  by  no  means  satisfactory.  "  St. 
Paul,"  he  says,  "  did  not  remind  the  Galatians  of  the  apostolic  decree,  be- 
cause they  already  had  it."  In  the  first  place,  it  docs  not  appear  with  cer- 
tainty that  they  had  it ;  in  the  second  place,  if  they  had  it,  this  was  rather 
a  reason  than  otherwise,  for  referring  them  to  it.  The  passage  in  the  Acts, 
from  which  Mr.  Locke  concludes  that  the  Galatic  churches  were  in  pos- 
session of  the  decree,  is  the  fourth  verse  of  the  sixteenth  chapter  ;  "  And,  as 
Ihey"  (Paul  and  Timothy)  "  went  through  the  cities,  they  delivered  them 
the  decrees  for  to  keep,  that  were  ordained  of  the  apostles  and  elders  which 
were  at  Jerusalem."  In  my  opinion,  this  delivery  of  the  decrees  was  con- 
fined to  the  churches  to  which  St.  Paul  came,  in  pursuance  of  the  plan  up- 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    GALaTIANS.  125 

Another  difficulty  arises  from  the  account  of  Peter's 
conduct  towards  the  '  lentile  converts  at  Antioch,  as  given 
in  the  epistle,  in  the  latter  part  of  the  second  chapter; 
which  conduct,  it  is  said,  is  consistent  neither  with  the 
revelation  communicated  to  him,  upon  the  conversion  of 
Cornelius,  nor  with  the  part  he  took  in  the  dehate  at  Je- 
rusalem.    But,  in  order  to  understand  either  the  difficulty 

on  which  he  set  oat,  "  of  visiting  the  brethren  in  every  city  where  he  had 
preached  the  word  of  the  Lord  j"  the  history  of  which  progress,  and  of  all 
that  pertained  to  it,  is  closed  in  the  fifth  verse,  when  the  history  informs 
that  "  so  were  the  church  s  established  in  the  faith,  and  increase  1  in  num- 
ber daily.''  Then  the  history  proceeds  upon  u  new  section  ofth  narrative, 
by  telling  us  that,  "  when  they  had  <j.mic  throughout  Phrygia  and  the  re- 
gion of  Galatia,  they  essayed  to  go  into  Bithynia."  The  decree  itself  is  di- 
rected to  "  the  brethren  which  are  of  the  Gentiles  in  Antioch,  Syria,  and 
Cilicia;"  that  is.  to  churches  already  founded,  and  in  which  tilts  question 
had  been  stirred.  And  I  think  the  observation  of  the  noble  author  of  the 
Miscellanea  Sacra  is  not  only  ingenious,  but  highly  probable,  viz..  that 
there  is,  in  this  place,  a  dislocation  of  the  text,  and  that  the  fourth  and  fifth 
verses  of  the  sixteenth  chapter  ought  to  follow  the  last  verse  of  the  fifteenth, 
so  as  to  make  the  entire  passage  run  thus  :  "  And  they  went  through  Syria 
and  Cilicia,"  (to  the  Christians  of  which  countries  the  decree  was  addressed), 
■'confirming  the  churches;  and,  as  they  went  through  the  cities,  they  de- 
livered them  the  decrees  for  to  keep,  that  were  ordained  of  the  apostles  and 
elders  which  w-ere  at  Jerusalem  ;  and  so  were  the  churches  established  in 
the  faith,  and  increased  in  number  daily."  And  then  the  sixteenth  chap- 
ter takes  up  a  new  and  unbroken  paragraph  :  4i  Then  came  he  to  Derbe 
and  Lystra,:'  &c.  When  St.  Paul  came,  as  he  did  into  Galatia,  lo  preach 
the  Gospel,  for  the  first  time,  in  a  new  place,  it  is  not  probable  that  he 
would  make  mention  of  the  decree,  or  rather  letter,  of  the  church  of  Jeru- 
salem, which  presupposed  Christianity  to  be  known,  and  which  related  to 
certain  doubts  that  had  arisen  in  some  established  Christian  communities. 

The  second  reason  which  Mr.  Locke  assigns  for  the  omission  of  the  de- 
cree, viz.  that  '■  St.  Paul's  sole  object  in  the  epistle  was  to  acquit  himsi  Ifol 
the  imputation  that  had  been  charged  upon  him  of  actually  preaching  cir- 
cumcision." does  not  appear  to  me  to  be  strictly  true.  It  was  not  the  sole 
object.  The  epistle  is  written  in  general  opposition  to  the  Judaizinir  inch- 
nations  which  he  found  to  prevail  amongst  his  converts.  The  avowal  of 
his  own  doctrine,  and  of  his  steadfast  adherence  to  that  doctrine,  formed  a 
ury  part  of  the  design  of  his  letter,  but  was  not  the  whole  of  it. 


126  THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    CALaTIANS. 

or  the  solution,  it  will  be  necessary  to  state  and  explain 
the  passage  itself.  "When  Peter  was  come  to  Antioch, 
I  withstood  him  to  the  face,  because  he  was  to  be  blamed  ; 
for,  before  that  certain  came  from  James,  he  did  eat  with 
the  Gentiles ;  but,  when  they  were  come,  he  withdrew 
and  separated  himself,  fearing  them  which  were  of  the 
circumcision  ;  and  the  other  Jews  dissembled  likewise 
with  him,  insomuch  that  Barnabas  also  was  carried  away 
with  their  dissimulation  :  but,  when  I  saw  they  walked  not 
uprightly,  according  to  the  truth  of  the  Gospel,  I  said 
unto  Peter,  before  them  all,  If  thou,  being  a  Jew,  livest 
after  the  manner  of  Gentiles,  and  not  as  do  the  Jews,  why 
compellest  thou  the  Gentiles  to  live  as  do  the  Jews?" 
Now  the  question  that  produced  the  dispute  to  which 
these  words  relate,  was  not  whether  the  Gentiles  were 
capable  of  being  admitted  into  the  Christian  covenant ; 
that  had  been  fully  settled  :  nor  was  it  whether  it  should 
be  accounted  essential  to  the  profession  of  Christianity 
that  they  should  conform  themselves  to  the  lawT  of  Moses ; 
that  was  the  question  at  Jerusalem  :  but  it  was,  whether, 
upon  the  Gentiles  becoming  Christians,  the  Jews  might 
henceforth  eat  and  drink  with  them,  as  with  their  own 
brethren.  Upon  this  point  St.  Peter  betrayed  some  in- 
constancy ;  and  so  he  might,  agreeably  enough  to  his 
history.  He  might  consider  the  vision  at  Joppa  as  a  di- 
rection for  the  occasion,  rather  than  as  universally  abol- 
ishing the  distinction  between  Jew  and  Gentile;  I  do  not 
mean  with  respect  to  final  acceptance  with  God,  but  as 
to  the  manner  of  their  living  together  in  society  ;  at  least 
he  might  not  have  comprehended  this  point  with  such 
clearness  and  certainty,  as  to  stand  out  upon  it  against 
the  fear  of  bringing  upon  himself  the  censure  and  com- 
plaint of  his  brethren  in  the  church  of  Jerusalem,  who 
still  adhered  to  their  ancient  prejudires.     But  Peter,  it  is 


THE    EPISTF-E    TO    THE    GALATIANS.  127 

said,  compelled  the  Gentiles  Ia8ai%eiv — *'Why  compellest 
thou  the  Gentiles  to  live  as  do  the  Jews?"  How  did  he 
do  that  ?  The  only  way  in  which  Peter  appears  to  have 
compelled  the  Gentiles  to  comply  with  the  Jewish  institu- 
tion was  by  withdrawing  himself  from  their  society.  By 
which  he  may  be  understood  to  have  made  this  declara- 
tion :  "  We  do  not  deny  your  right  to  be  considered  as 
Christians ;  we  do  not  deny  your  title  in  the  promises  of 
the  Gospel,  even  without  compliance  with  our  law :  but, 
if  you  would  have  us  Jews  live  with  you  as  we  do  with 
one  another,  that  is,  if  you  would  in  all  inspects  be  treated 
by  us  as  Jews,  you  must  live  as  such  yourselves."  This, 
I  think,  was  the  compulsion  which  St.  Peter's  conduct 
imposed  upon  the  Gentiles,  and  •  for  which  St.  Paul  re- 
proved him. 

As  to  the  part  which  the  historian  ascribes  to  St.  Peter 
in  the  debate  at  Jerusalem,  besides  that  it  was  a  different 
question  which  was  there  agitated  from  that  which  pro- 
duced the  dispute  at  Antioch,  there  is  nothing  to  hinder 
us  from  supposing  that  the  dispute  at  Antioch  was  prior 
to  the  consultation  at  Jerusalem  ;  or  that  Peter,  in  conse- 
quence of  this  rebuke,  might  have  afterwards  maintained 
firmer  sentiments. 


CHAPTER  VI. 

THE  EPISTLE  TO  THE  EPHESIANS. 
No.    I. 

This  epistle,  and  the  Epistle  to  the  Colossians,  appear 
to  have  been  transmitted  to  their  respective  churches  by 
the  same  messenger :  "  but,  that  ye  also  may  know  my 
affairs,  and  how  I  do,  Tychicus,  a  beloved  brother  and 
faithful  minister  in  the  Lord,  shall  make  known  to  you  all 
things  ;  whom  I  have  sent  unto  you  for  the  same  purpose, 
that  ye  might  know  our  affairs,  and  that  he  might  com- 
fort your  hearts."  Ephes.,  chap.  vi.  21,  22.  This  text, 
if  it  do  not  expressly  declare,  clearly  I  think  intimates, 
that  the  letter  was  sent  by  Tychicus.  The  words  made 
use  of  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Colossians  are  very  similar  to 
these,  and  afford  the  same  implication,  that  Tychicus,  in 
conjunction  with  Onesimus,  was  the  bearer  of  the  letter 
to  that  church :  "  All  my  state  shall  Tychicus  declare 
unto  you,  who  is  a  beloved  brother,  and  a  faithful  minis- 
ter, and  fellow  servant  in  the  Lord ;  whom  I  have  sent 
unto  you  for  the  same  purpose,  that  he  might  know  your 
estate,  and  comfort  your  hearts  ;  with  Onesimus,  a  faith- 
ful and  beloved  brother,  who  is  one  of  you.  They  shall 
make  known  unto  you  all  things  which  are  done  here." 
Colos.,  chap.  iv.  7 — 9.  Both  epistles  represent  the  writer 
as  under  imprisonment  for  the  Gospel;  and  both  treat  of 
the  same  general  subject.  The  Epistle  therefore  to  the 
Ephe'sians,  and  the  Epistle  to  the  Colossians,  import  to  be 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    EPHESIANS.  ]  2D 

two  letters  written  by  the  same  person,  at,  or  nearly  at, 
the  same  time,  and  upon  the  same  subject,  and  to  have 
been  sent  by  the  same  messenger.  Now,  every  thing  in 
the  sentiments,  order,  and  diction  of  the  two  writings, 
corresponds  with  what  might  be  expected  from  this  cir- 
cumstance of  identity  or  cognation  in  their  original.  The 
leading  doctrine  of  both  epistles  is  the  union  of  Jews  and 
Gentiles  under  the  Christian  dispensation ;  and  that  doc- 
trine in  both  is  established  by  the  same  arguments,  or, 
more  properly  speaking,  illustrated  by  the  same  simili- 
tudes:* "one  head,"  "one  body,"  "one  new  man,"'  "one 
temple,"  are  in  both  epistles  the  figures  under  which  the 
society  of  believers  in  Christ,  and  their  common  relation 
to  him  as  such,  is  represented."!"  The  ancient,  and,  as 
had  been  thought,  the  indelible  distinction  between  Jew 
and  Gentile-,  in  both  epistles,  is  declared  to  be  "now  abol- 
ished by  his  cross."  Besides  this  consent  in  the  general 
tenor  of  the  two  epistles,  and  in  the  run  also  and  warmth 
of  thought  with  which  they  are  composed,  we  may  nat- 
urally expect,  in  letters  produced  under  the  circumstan- 
ces in  which  these  appear  to  have  been  written,  a  closer 
resemblance  of  style  and  diction  than  between  other  let- 
ters of  the  same  person  but  of  distant  dates,  or  between 
letters  adapted  to  different  occasions.     In  particular  we 

*  St.  Paul,  I  am  apt  to  believe,  has  been  sometimes  accused  of  inconclu- 
sive reasoning,  by  our  mistaking  that  for  reasoning  which  was  only  intend*  d 
for  illustration.  lie  is  not  to  be  read  as  a  man.  whose  own  persuasion  of 
the  truth  of  what  he  taught  always  or  solely  depended  np  n  the  >'  wb  un- 
der which  he  represents  it  in  his  writings.  Taking  for  granted  the  cer- 
tainty of  his  doctrine,  a>  resting  upon  the  revelation  that  had  been  imparted 
to  him,  he  exhibits  it  frequently  to  the  conception  of  his  readers  under  ima- 
ges anl  aH  igories,  in  which,  if  an  analogy  may  be  perceived,  or  even  some- 
times a  poetic  n  semblance  be  found,  it  is  all  perhaps  that  is  required, 

■f  Compare  Ephesians  i.  22:  iv.  15:  ii.  15:  with  Colossians  i.  Is:  ii.  1!*' 
iii.  10,  1 1.  Also,  Ephesians  ii.  14,  15:  ii.  1G:  ii.  "JJ :  with  Colossians  ii.  14  : 
i.  18—01  :  ii.  7. 

6* 


130  THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    EPHESIANS. 

may  look  for  many  of  the  same  expressions,  and  some- 
times for  whole  sentences  being  alike  ;  since  such  expres- 
sions and  sentences  would  be  repeated  in  the  second  let- 
ter (whichever  that  was)  as  yet  fresh  in  the  author's  mind 
from  the  writing  of  the  first.  This  repetition  occurs  in 
the  following  examples  :* 

Ephes.,  ch.  i.  7.  "In  whom  we  have  redemption 
through  his  blood,  the  forgiveness  of  sins."t 

Colo?.,  ch.  i.  14.  "In  whom  we  have  redemption 
through  his  blood,  the  forgiveness  of  sins."J 

Besides  the  sameness  of  the  words,  it  is  farther  re- 
markable that  the  sentence  is,  in  both  places,  preceded  by 
the  same  introductory  idea.  In  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephe- 
sians  it  is  the  "beloved"  (rjyamjfievf^  ;  in  that  to  the  Colos- 
sians,  it  is  "his  dear  $on"  {tim  ir\s  ayanris  «yr«),  "in  whom 
we  have  redemption."  The  sentence  appears  to  have 
been  suggested  to  the  mind  of  the  writer  by  the  idea 
which  had  accompanied  it  before. 

Ephes.,  ch.  i.  10.  "  All  things  both  which  are  in  heaven 
and  which  are  in  earth,  even  in  bim."§ 

Colos.,  ch.  i.  20.  "  All  things  by  him,  whether  they  be 
things  in  earth,  or  things  in  heaven. v|| 

This  quotation  is  the  more  observable,  because  the  con- 
necting of  things  in  earth  with  things  in  heaven  is  a  very 
singular  sentiment,  and  found  nowhere  else   but  in  these 

*  When  verbal  comparisons  arc  relied  upon,  it  becomes  necessary  to  state 
the  original ;  but.  that  the  English  reader  may  be  interrupted  as  little  as  may 
be,  I  shall  in  general  do  this  in  the  notes. 

T  EpheS.,  chap.  1  ,  7.  L.r  <j  CVOfisi  rr;i<  a-o\vrpoy(riv  Sia  tov  at  paras  avrov, 
r/jr  wpaiv  ruiv  napaitTtajtartav'. 

tf  Colos.,  chap,  i.,  14.  Ei>  ti  c^optv  ri\v  airo^vrptoctv  Sia  tov  atuaros  avrov, 
Ttiv  a<pcoiv  rav  iftaprtiov.  However  it  mast  be  observed  that,  in  this  latter 
text,  many  copies  have  not  <5ia  tov  atparos  avmv. 

fy   EpheS.,  chap,  i.,  10.        'I  a  tc  CV  rots  ovpavots  Kai  ra  tin    T/jf  yrj;,  cv  avrto. 
J|    Colos.,  chap,  i.,  20.       Ai*  avrov,  arc  ra  cm  Tin  yr/?,  tire  ra   if  rots   ovpavots. 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    EPIIESIANS.  131 

two  epistles.  The  words  also  are  introduced  and  fol- 
lowed by  a  train  of  thought  nearly  alike.  They  are  in- 
troduced by  describing  the  union  which  Christ  had  ef- 
fected, and  they  are  followed  by  telling  the  Gentile 
churches  that  they  were  incorporated  into  it. 

Ephes.,  ch.  iii.  2.  "The  dispensation  of  the  grace  of 
God,  which  is  given  me  to  you  ward."* 

Colos.,  ch.  i.  25.  "  The  dispensation  of  God,  which  is 
given  to  me  for  you."f 

Of  these  sentences  it  may  likewise  be  observed  that  the 
accompanying  ideas  are  similar.  In  both  places  they  are 
immediately  preceded  by  the  mention  of  his  present  suf- 
ferings ;  in  both  places  they  are  immediately  followed  by 
the  mention  of  the  mystery  which  was  the  great  subject 
of  his  preaching. 

Ephes.,  6h.  v.  19.  "In  psalms  and  hymns  and  spir- 
itual songs,  singing  and  making  melody  in  your  hearts  to 
the  Lord."J 

Colos.,  ch.  iii.  16.  "In  psalms  and  hymns  and  spir- 
itual songs,  singing  with  grace  in  your  hearts  to  the 
Lord."§ 

Ephes.,  ch.  vi.  22.  u  Whom  I  have  sent  unto  you  for 
the  same  purpose,  that  ye  might  know  our  affairs,  and 
that  he  might  comfort  your  hearts. "|| 

Colos.,  ch.  iv.  8.     ''  Whom  I  have  sent  unto  you  for 

*  Ephes.,  chap,  iii.,  2.  T/ji»  oiKovo^iav  j^apiros  rov  Qcov  rtis  &oOaani  f">i  n? 
iftas. 

T  Colos.,  chap,  i.,  25.      T/jv  oiKovojiiav  tov  Qcov  rt)v  SaOciaav  ftot  eif  vjias. 

X  Ephes.,  chap,  v.,  19.  *Pa,\|<o<?  Kai  ifivoi;,  kcii  tiSais  TTfCVfiaTiKaii,  aiavrcs 
KM  ipaWovTCS  cv  tt)  *ao('ia  vjiwv  rw  Kvpir.i. 

§  Colos.,  chap,  iii.,  16.  ^PaA^oij  nai  vpvois,Kai  toSais  -veVjxaTiKatf,  ev  XaP17' 
a&ovTts  ev  ti)  napiia  ifioiv  ru  K/upiw. 

||  Lphes.,  chap,  vi.,  22.  'Ov  enc/upa  xpos  vpas  as  avro  tovto,  [vol  yvuirc  ra 
vcpt  li/icdv,  icai  TrapanaXccr)  rat  Kupcias  iftcov. 


132  THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    EPHESIANS. 

the  same  purpose,  that  he  might  know  your  estate,  ano 
comfort  your  hearts."* 

In  these  examples,  we  do  not  perceive  a  cento  of 
phrases  gathered  from  one  composition,  and  strung  to 
gether  with  the  other;  but  the  occasional  occurrence  of 
the  same  expression  to  a  mind  a  second  time  revolving 
the  same  ideas. 

2.  Whoever  writes  two  letters,  or  two  discourses, 
nearly  upon  the  same  subject,  and  at  no  great  distance  of 
time,  but  without  any  express  recollection  of  what  he  had 
written  before,  will  find  himself  repeating  some  senten- 
ces' in  the  very  order  of  the  words  in  which  he  had  al- 
ready used  them ;  but  he  will  more  frequently  find  him- 
self employing  some  principal  terms,  with  the  order  inad- 
vertently changed,  or  with  the  order  disturbed  by  the  in- 
termixture of  other  words  and  phrases  expressive  of  ideas 
rising  up  at  the  time  :  or  in  many  instances  repeating  not 
single  words,  nor  yet  whole  sentences,  but  parts  and  frag- 
ments of  sentences.  Of  all  these  varieties  the  examina- 
tion of  our  two  epistles  will  furnish  plain  examples ;  and 
I  should  rely  upon  this  class  of  instances  more  than  upon 
the  last ;  because,  although  an  impostor  might  transcribe 
into  a  forgery  entire  sentences  and  phrases,  yet  the  dis- 
location of  words,  the  partial  recollection  of  phrases  and 
sentences,  the  intermixture  of  new  terms  and  new  ideas 
with  terms  and  ideas  before  used,  which  will  appear  in  the 
examples  that  follow,  and  which  are  the  natural  properties 
of  writings  produced  under  the  circumstances  in  which 
these  epistles  are  represented  to  have  been  composed — ■ 
would  not,  I  think,  have  occurred  to  the  invention  of  a  for- 
ger ;  nor,  if  they  had  occurred,  would  they  have  been  so  ea- 
sily executed.     This  studied  variation  was  a  refinement  in 

*    Coll   J.,  Cuap.   IV.,  8.       V  'i    .'-'/''.it  nv/fis   upas  £ij   avro   tovto,  Iva  VVtp  Tt»    Itgpt 
vuoiv,  Kai  itapaicabtzri  ruj  ku  ( 


TnE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    EPHESIA  NsS.  133 

forgery  which  I  believe  did  not  exist ;  or,  if  we  can  sup- 
pose it  to  have  been  practised  in  the  instances  adduced  be- 
low, why,  it  may  be  asked,  was  not  the  same  art  exercised 
upon  those  which  we  have  collected  in  the  preceding  class  ? 

Ephes.,  ch.  i.  19  ;  ch.  ii.  5.  "  Towards  us  who  believe, 
according  to  the  working  of  his  mighty  power,  which  he 
wrought  in  Christ,  when  he  raised  him  from  the  dead, 
(and  set  him  at  his  own  right  hand  in  the  heavenly  places, 
far  above  all  principality,  and  power,  and  might,  and  do- 
minion, and  every  name  that  is  named,  not  only  in  this 
world,  but  in  that  which  is  to  come.  And  hath  put  all 
things  under  his  feet :  and  gave  him  to  be  the  head  over 
all  things,  to  the  church  which  is  his  body,  the  fulness  of 
all  things,  that  filleth  all  in  all) ;  and  you  hath  he  quick- 
ened, who  are  dead  in  trespasses  and  sins,  (wherein  in 
time  past  ye  walked  according  to  the  course  of  this  world, 
according  to  the  prince  of  the  power  of  the  air,  the  spirit 
that  now  worketh  in  the  children  of  disobedience  ;  among 
whom  also  we  all  had  our  conversation,  in  times  past,  in 
the  lust  of  our  flesh,  fulfilling  the  desires  of  the  flesh  and 
of  the  mind,  and  were  by  nature  the  children  of  wrath, 
even  as  others.  But  God,  who  is  rich  in  mercy,  for  his 
great  love  wherewithal  he  loved  us,)  even  when  we  were 
dead  in  sins,  hath  quickened  us  together  with  Christ/'* 

Colos.,  ch.  ii.  12,  13.  "  Through  the  faith  of  the  ope- 
ration of  God,  who  hath  raised  him  from  the  dead :  and 
you,  being  dead  in  yoUr  sins  and  the  uncircumcision  of 
the  flesh,  hath  he  quickened  together  with  him."f 

*  Ephes.,  chap,  i.,  19,  20  :  iL,  1,  5.  Totij  msrtvoiTixs  Kara  rrjn  tvtpyuat' 
vto  Kpixr jvi  Till  it^-voj  avroVf  fjv  cvrtpyr/aci'  cv  rM  Xpiort.i,  cys(pa;  avrov  ck  vtupoiv' 
Km  BnaOiacvsv  <5r£ia  avrov  cv  rati  enovpaviois — xai  vfia;  ovras  vc*pov$  rots  Traparrrw 
liti<ri  cai  ran  a^tapriais — vui  01  raj  fifi'ts  vexpoVf  rot;  jraonTrrco/iaji,  avvt^iourroiriat  tu> 
Xo(<rrw. 

t   Colos.,  chap,  ii.,  12,  13.      Am  rq;  nturcuji  tijj    cvcpyeus  tov  Oeov  rov  tyci- 


134  THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    EPHESIANS. 

Out  of  the  long  quotation  from  the  Ephesians,  take 
away  the  parentheses,  and  you  have  left  a  sentence  al- 
most in  terms  the  same  as  the  short  quotation  from  the 
Colossians.  The  resemblance  is  more  visible  in  the  orig- 
inal than  in  our  translation  ;  for  what  is  rendered  in  one 
place,  •'  the  working,"  and  in  another  the  "  operation,"  is 
the  same  Greek  term  epsgyeta:  in  one  place  it  is,  rovg  ma- 

jsvoviag  xutx  ii]P  spsgyeiav  •   in  the   Other,  Sia  irtg  niaxewg  irjg 

eregyeiag.  Here,  therefore,  we  have  the  same  sentiment, 
and  nearly  in  the  same  words ;  but,  in  the  Ephesians, 
twice  broken  or  interrupted  by  incidental  thoughts,  which 
St.  Paul,  as  his  manner  was,  enlarges  upon  by  the  way,* 
and  then  returns  to  the  thread  of  his  discourse.  It  is  in- 
terrupted the  first  time  by  a  view  which  breaks  in  upon 
his  mind  of  the  exaltation  of  Christ;  and  the  second  time 
by  a  description  of  heathen  depravity.  I  have  only  to 
remark  that  Griesbach,  in  his  very  accurate  edition,  gives 
the  parentheses  very  nearly  in  the  same  manner  in  which 
they  are  here  placed ;  and  that  without  any  respect  to 
the  comparison  which  we  are  proposing. 

Ephes.,  ch.  iv.  2 — 4.  ''With  all  lowliness  and  meek- 
ness, with  long-suffering,  forbearing  one  another  in  love ; 
endeavoring  to  keep  the  unity  of  the  Spirit,  in  the  bond  of 
peace.  There  is  one  body  and  one  Spirit,  even  as  ye 
are  called  in  one  hope  of  your  calling."f 

Colos.,  ch.  iii.  12 — 15.  "Put  on  therefore,  as  the  elect 
of  God,  holy  and  beloved,  bowels  of  mercies,  kindness, 
humbleness  of  mind,  meekness,  long-suffering,  forbearing 

pavros  avrov  en  roiy  vtKpoiv.  Kai  ijias  vcupovf  ovra;  cv  tois  TTapa-RTtojtaai  nai  ttj 
aKDoBvcTia  rr]S  oapKOS  ti/iwi',  avvc^coonotrioc  aw  avro>. 

*  Vide  Locke  in  loc. 

"f"  Ephes.,  chap,  iv.,  2 — 4.  Mtra  -airijj  Tanctvo'Ppoavvrji  Kai  xpaorrfros,  ficra 
fiaKpoOv/ttai,  avcyofcvoi  a\\n\iov  cv  ayany  oKovSa^ovrc;  rqpciv  Tr\v  cvorrjTa  tov 
vvevfiaros  cv  r«  vvuisgfilf  r>K  lipids.  'YLv  oiopa  Kai  Iv  irycvpa}  Ka9ioi  Kai  «X»jO»;r£ 
tv  pia  cXxiSi  rrji  k\ticcc>$  vuiov. 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    EPHE3I£.NS.-  135 

one  another  and  forgiving  one  another;  if  any  man  have 
a  quarrel  against  any,  even  as  Christ  forgave  you,  so  also 
do  ye  ;  and,  above  all  these  things,  put  on  charity,  which 
is  the  bond  of  perfectness ;  and  let  the  peace  of  God  rule 
in  your  hearts,  to  the  which  also  ye  are  called  in  one 
body."* 

In  these  two  quotation  the  words  TaneuoopgoovvT],  ttquottj;, 
ftuxQoOvfttu,  avexotuevov  allrjlwv ,  occur  in  exactly  the  same 
order :  ay  ant]  is  also  found  in  both,  but  in  a  different  con- 
nection :  avpSeauo;  xrtg  etoijvtjg  answers  to  oovdsaftog  itjg  re- 
XetOTijrog;  ex).t]dt]rs  fv  ivi  ooiuuti  to  cv  mafia  xudtog  y.ui  (xXtjdtjre 
ev  fun  s-A-mSt :  yet  is  this  similitude  found  in  the  midst  of 
sentences  otherwise  very  different. 

Ephes.,  ch.  iv.  16.  "From  whom  the  whole  body  fitly 
joined  together,  and  compacted  by  that  which  every  joint 
supplieth  according  to  the  effectual  working  in  the  mea- 
sure of  every  part,  maketh  increase  of  the  body.''t 

Colos.,  ch.  ii.  19.  "  From  which  all  the  body,  by  joints 
and  bands,  having  nourishment  ministered  and  knit  to- 
gether, increaseth  with  the  increase  of  God. "J 

In  these  quotations  are  read  «s  ov  nav  to  aw,««  ovuG&atp. 
HEVov  in  both  places :  Eni/nQi^ovuEvov  answering  to  aniyoq- 
tjytag  :   8tu  tidv  ciqrwv  diet  naoijg  deprjg  ;   au^si  ti]p  av^tjatv  notsuut, 

iTjV  av£rtoiv  ;  and  yet  the  sentences  are  considerably  di- 
versified in  other  parts. 

*  Colos.,  chap.  iii.  12 — 15.  Eviyc-acOc  ovv  <I>j  uXenVI  tov  Ocov  aytot  km 
'lyavtipcvoi,  (tTc\ay^va  oiKTipfiuv,  ■vprjzTGTriTa,  ranrtlt>o<ppo<n»rt)V,  ItpaOTtlTQ,  fiaiepoOv- 
uiaW  ave^Oftevoi  <iX,\rj\<ji>,  Kat  ^apt^o/tcvot  iavrois,  cav  rij  irpos  Ttva  c^rj  popfprjv' 
Kado><  Kat  o  XpiOTOS  c^apiiraro  ipiv,  bvrto  Kat  vpets"  cm  vast  it  tovtois  Tt)v  ayaxrjv, 
i)tij  cart  avvSeafibs  rrjt  rtXaorjjTOS"  Kat  i;  e tpqvt)  tov  Ocov  0pa0tueTb>  ev  tm;  KapStatf 
vuu)v,  ctf  fjVKOt  ckXijO^tc  ev  evt  aotftart. 

t  EpheS.,  chap,  iv.,  16.  E£  bv  -rrav  to  ooma  irvvapfioXoyaVficvov  km  ovpPiPa- 
typtvov  ha  Truer;;  u^jjf  tijj  eitiyopTfytaS  xar  tvtpyttav  ev  pcrpt,)  Lvo;  cKtHrrov  pepovs 
tt)v  av^i\Mv  tov  owpaTOS  rvteiTai. 

t   Colos.,  chap,  ii.,  19.      E|  bv  trav  to  oiopatta  Trov  witov  km  avvictrptov  crrix" 
ptjyovpevov  km  ovpfJtSa^opevov,  avfet  ttjv  av^tinv  tov  Ocov. 


136  THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    EPHESIANS. 

Ephes.,  chap.  iv.  32.  "And  be  kind  one  to  another 
tender-hearted,  forgiving  one  another,  even  as  God,  for 
Christ's  sake,  hath  forgiven  you."* 

Colos.,  ch.  iii.  13.  '"Forbearing  one  another,  and  for- 
giving one  another,  if  any  man  have  a  quarrel  against 
any;  even  as  Christ  forgave  you,  so  also  do  ye."f 

Here  we  have  "  forgiving  one  another,  even  as  God, 
for  Christ's  sake  (ev  Xgiaia),  hath  forgiven  you,"  in  the 
first  quotation,  substantially  repeated  in  the  second.  But 
in  the  second  the  sentence  is  broken  by  the  interposition 
of  a  new  clause,  "  if  any  man  have  a  quarrel  against  any  ;" 
and  the  latter  part  is' a  little  varied  ;  instead  of  "  God  in 
Chris;/'  it  is  "Christ  hath  forgiven  you." 

Ephes.,  ch.  iv.  22 — 24.  "That  ye  put  off  concerning 
the  former  conversation  the  old  man,  which  is  corrupt  ac- 
cording to  the  deceitful  lusts,  and  be  renewed  in  the  spirit 
of  your  mind  ;  and  that  ye  put  on  the  new  man,  which 
after  God,  is  created  in  righteousness  and  true  holiness.''! 

Colos.,  chap.  iii.  9,  10.  "Seeing  that  ye  have  put  off 
the  old  man  with  his  deeds,  and  have  put  on  the  new  man, 
which  is  renewed  in  knowledge,  after  the  image  of  him 
that  created  him."§ 

In  these  quotations,  "  putting  off  the  old  man  and  put- 
ting on  the  new,"  appears  in  both.  The  idea  is  farther 
explained  by  calling  it  a  renewal ;  in  the  one,  "renewed 

,  cliap.  iv'.,  32.  Yivta&i  (';  si;  a\\ri\ovs  y^prjcrot,  zvair\ayxyoi,  Xa?l~ 
fyfievoi  lavroif,  KaQus  k<*i  o  Oeo;  iv  Xfuora)  z^apioaro  huiv. 

t   C  iii.,  1.''.      .'.:  t  Y"/"1'  '  "<\A>jA<.):<,  '"ii  x<xpi$oiievot  tavruij,  eav  ri 

1  ,:,  1  tfi   is'  km  b  Xpiarn?  i^aptaaro  V'ttv,  bvno  km  v/icis. 

.    Epl  1.   iv.  22 — 24.      A.^a0t7'Jai  ii/ia;  Kara  rrjv    -npoTCpav  avaarpo^v, 

rov  tuv  ijjOctpofiCfOi/  Kara  rai  i-mOv/uas  rrjj  airarrn'  avavtovaOai  it 
r&MTvVvuari  -  Bat  rov  Kaivov  avQpuivov,  rov  Kara  Oeuv  ktic- 

0:iti  i.  >njn  rr\i  a\yOe;af. 

§  CploB.,  chap,  iii.,  'J,  10.  A^Lkivrjaiuimi  tuv  ra\aiov  avOpcoirov  aw  rai$ 
■xpa^caiv  avrov'  kul  cvlvaa/icvot  tuv  vcov,  rov  avaxatvovfievov  us  cxiyvcoaiv  Arar* eixova 
rnv  kti-uvt»s  avrov. 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    KPHESIANS.  -  137 

m  the  spirit  of  your  mind;"  in  the  other,  "renewed  in 
knowledge."  In  both,  the  new  man  is  said  to  be  formed 
according  to  the  same  model ;  in  the  one,  he  is  after  God 
created  in  righteousness  and  true  holiness ;"  in  the  other, 
"he  is  renewed  after  the  image  of  him  that  created  him." 
In  a  word,  it  is  the  same  person  writing  upon  a  kindred 
subject,  with  the  terms  and  ideas  which  he  had  before 
employed  still  floating  in  his  memory."* 

Ephes.,  ch.  v.  C — 8.  ';  Because  of  these  things  cometh 
the  wrath  of  God  upon  the  childen  of  disobedience  :  be  not 
ye  therefore  partakers  with  them ;  for  ye  were  some- 
times darkness,  but  now  are  ye  light  in  the  Lord  ;  walk 
as  children  of  light."f 

Colos.,  ch.  iii.  C — 8.  "  For  which  thing's  sake  the 
wrath  of  God  cometh  upon  the  children  of  disobedience  ; 
in  the  which  ye  also  walked  some  time,  when  ye  lived  in 
them.     But  now  ye  also  put  off  all  these."J 

These  verses  afford  a  specimen  of  that  partial  resem- 
blance which  is  only  to  be  met  with  when  no  imitation  is 
designed,  when  no  studied  recollection  is  employed,  but 
when  the  mind,  exercised  upon  the  same  subject,  is  left 
to  the  spontaneous  return  of  such  terms  and  phrases  as, 
having  been  used  before,  may  happen  to  present  them- 
selves again.     The  sentiment  of  both  passages  is  through- 

*  In  these  comparisons,  we  often  perceive  the  reason  why  the  writer, 
though  expressing  the  same  idea,  uses  a  different  term  ;  namely,  because 
the  term  before  used  is  employed  in  the  sentence  under  a  different  form : 
rims,  in  the  quotations  under  our  eye,  the  new  man  is  xatvos  avQpanros  in  the 
Bphesiahd,  and  tov  vcuv  in  the  Colossians  ;  but  then  it  is  because  tov  Kawoi- 
is  used  in  the  next  word,  avaKatvovjievov. 

■J"  Ephes.,  chap,  v.,  6 — 8.  Ata  ravra  yap  cp%srai  >'i  opyrj  tov  Qcov  ctu  tov* 
viovi  rij?  entciBstas.  M/j  ovv  ytvtoOc  aviijteru^oi  aVTiov.  IIt:  yap  -rare  okotos, 
»w  Sc  <!>cos  cv  Ki'pito*   cjj  rcKva  (pioros  ncpi-aTCire. 

t  Colos.,  chap,  iii.,  G — 8.  At  d  cpxCTat  h  °pyv  T0V  Otou  c~i  tov;  viov;  ti/s 
airci6sias'  cv  bti  Kai  vficis  TrcpisvarnaaTC  tzotc,  ore  cfrrc  cv  avrois.  Nui't  6c  airo- 
Oczds  nai  Vjtcis  TO.  travra. 


138  THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    EPIIE3IANS. 

out  alike  :  half  of  that  sentiment,  the  denunciation  of  God's 
wrath,  is  expressed  in  identical  words ;  the  other  half, 
viz.  the  admonition  to  quit  their  former  conversation,  in 
words  entirely  different. 

Ephes.,  ch.  v.  15, 1G.  "  See  then  that  ye  walk  circum- 
spectly ;  not  as  fools,  but  as  wise,  redeeming  the  time. "* 

Colos.,  ch.  iv.  5.  "  Walk  in  wisdom  towards  them  that 
are  without,  redeeming  the  time."  f 

This  is  another  example  of  that  mixture  which  we  re- 
marked of  sameness  and  variety  in  the  language  of  one 
writer.  "Redeeming  the  time"  («S«}'o£u^),«£joi  iov  xuir>ov)f 
is  a  literal  repetition.  ';  Walk  not  as  fools,  but  as  wise," 
7XEQ17UXTEITE  fit]  &;  uoocfoi,  aV.'  6;  cro<poi)}  answers  exactly 
in  sense,  and  nearly  in  terms,  to  "walk  in  wisdom,"  (er 
uocfiq  Txe^inaTsiis^.  JTeQinuTtne  uxQtGiog  is  a  very  different 
phrase,  but  is  intended  to  convey  precisely  the  same  idea 
as  nsQinccjeiiB  tiqos  tovg  eiw.  ^txqi3w;  is  not  well  rendered 
"circumspectly."  It  means  what  in  modern  speech  we 
should  call  "  correctly  ;"  and  when  we  advise  a  person  to 
behave  "correctly,"  our  advice  is  always  given  with  a 
reference  "  to  the  opinion  of  others,"  kqo;  iov;  sl-at,  "  Walk 
correctly,  redeeming  the  time,"  i.  e.  suiting  yourselves  to 
the  difficulty  and  ticklishness  of  the  times  in  which  we 
live,  "because  the  days  are  evil." 

Ephes.,  ch.  vi.  19,  20.  "And  (praying)  for  me,  that 
utterance  may  be  given  unto  me,  that  I  may  open  my 
mouth  boldly  to  make  known  the  mystery  of  the  Gospel, 
for  which  I  am  an  ambassador  in  bonds,  that  therein  1 
may  speak  boldly,  as  I  ought  to  speak.'\t 

*  Ephes.,  chap,  v.,  15,  1G.  B\ckctc  «w  itwj  aitpiffus  -rtpiirartirc  fir]  i$  aao- 
Aoi,  aXX'  ws  aoifiot,  t^'iyopa^ptvai  tov  ttaipov. 

t  Colos.,  chap,  iv.,  5.  Ev  oofta  TrcpinaTCirc  npa;  rorj  «|o),  tov  Kaipov  r^ayo 
pa^Ojievoi. 

t    Ephes.,  chap,  vi.,  19,  20.      Km    vircp   Cjiov,    [|/a   pot    JjOcij  \oyoi  tv  aioi£f. 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    EPHESIAN8.  139 

Colos.,  ch.  iv.  3,  4.  "Withal  praying  also  for  us  that 
God  would  open  unto  us  a  door  of  utterance  to  speak  the 
mystery  of  Christ,  for  which  I  am  also  in  bonds,  that  I 
may  make  it  manifest  as  I  ought  to  speak."* 

In  these  quotations,  the  phrase  "  as  I  ought  to  speak" 
(u>s  du  >te  laXijoat),  the  words  "utterance"  (}oyog),  "a  mys- 
tery" (uvoir,Qiov},  "open"  («"><£>,  and  ev  uvoi$ei)t  are  the 
same.  u  To  make  known  the  mystery  of  the  Gospel" 
yyioiotaui  to  ftvoTrjqior),  answers  to  "make  it  manifest" 
(uu  (furegowb)  avio) ;  "  for  which  I  am  an  ambassador  in 
bonds"  (iW^  6v  nqtoGevb}  ev  ulvoet),  to  "for  which  I  am 
also  in  bonds"  (<V  6  xai  dedeftai). 

Ephes.,  ch.  v.  22.  "  Wives,  submit  yourselves  to  your 
own  husbands,  as  unto  the  Lord,  for  the  husband  is  the 
head  of  the  wife,  even  as  Christ  is  the  head  of  the  church, 
and  he  is  the  Saviour  of  the  body.  Therefore,  as  the 
church  is  subject  unto  Christ,  so  let  the  wives  be  to  their 
own  husbands  in  every  thing.  Husbands,  Jove  your  wives, 
even  as  Christ  also  loved  the  church,  and  gave  himself 
for  it,  that  he  might  sanctify  and  cleanse  it  with  the  wash- 
ing of  water  by  the  word ;  that  he  might  present  it  to 
himself  a  glorious  church,  not  having  spot  or  wrinkle,  or 
any  such  thing;  but  that  it  should  be  holy  and  without 
blemish.  So  ought  men  to  love  their  wives  as  their  own 
bodies.  He  that  loveth  his  wife  loveth  himself;  for  no 
man  ever  yet  hated  his  own  flesh,  but  nourisheth  and 
cherisheth  it,  even  as  the  Lord  the  church ;  for  we  are 
members  of  his  body,  of  his  flesh,  and  of  his  bones.  For 
this  cause  shall  a  man  leave  his  father  and  his  mother, 
and  be  joined  unto  his  wife,  and  they  two  shall  be  one 

tov  crofiarot  /ioti  t»  ~upjtr]Tia,   ywptaai  to  fivornpiov    tov   evayys\iov,  vntp  uv  rp- 
Qcvui  cv  irWfi,  \va  ci>  avrot  napptjaiaabijtai,  u>$  Set  pc  XaXfjcai. 

*  Colos.,  chap.  IV.,  3,  4.  Tlpoacv^opcvot  apa  vai  vepi  fiuiov,  tva  b  Oeos  avotfo 
ilfitv  Ovpav  row  \oyov,  XaXijjai  to  pvarriptov  tov  Kptorov  Si  b  nat  SeSepat,  tva  C-«vf 
Qbitttj)  avro,  dij  Stt  fue   XaXijirai. 


140  THE  EPISTLE  TO  THE  EPHE3IANS. 

flesh.  This  is  a  great  mystery  ;  but  I  speak  concerning 
Christ  and  the  church.  Nevertheless,  let  every  one  of 
you  in  particular  so  love  his  wife  even  as  himself;  and 
the  wife  see  that  she  reverence  her  husband.  Children, 
obey  your  parents,  in  the  Lord,  for  this  is  right.  Honor 
thy  father  and  thy  mother  (which  is  the  first  command- 
ment with  promise),  that  it  may  be  well  with  thee,  and 
that  thou  mayest  live  long  on  the  earth.  And,  ye  fathers, 
provoke  not  your  children  to  wrath,  but  bring  them  up  in 
the  nurture  and  admonition  of  the  Lord.  Servants,  be 
obedient  to  them  that  are  your  masters  according  to  the 
Jiesh,  with  fear  and  trembling,  in  singleness  of  your  heart, 
as  unto  Christ ;  not  with  eye-service,  as  men-pleasers,  but 
as  the  servants  of  Christ,  doing  the  will  of  God  from  the 
heart ;  with,  good  will  doing  service,  as  to  the  Lord,  and 
not  to  men  ;  knowing  that  whatsoever  good  thing  any  man 
doeth,  the  same  shall  lie  receive  of  the  Lord,  whether  he  be 
bond  or  free.  And  ye,  masters,  do  the  same  thing  unto 
them,  forbearing  threatening  ;  knowing  that  your  Master 
also  is  in  heaven,  neither  is  there  respect  of  persons  with 
him."* 

f  Colos.,  chap,  iii.,  18.      "  Wives,  submit  yourselves 

*  EpllCS.  chap,  v.,  22.  'At  yvvauccit  toij  Utois  avopaatv  viroraaacadc,  cij  to 
Knpiw. 

■)"  Colos.,  chap,  iii.,  18.  'Ai  yvvaines,  vTrorao-ocoQt  tois  iStots  av&paviv,  <L; 
avrjxcv  tn  KtipcfJ. 

EpheS.      'Ot  avtpcs,  ayanurc  Ta;  yvvaixai  lavroiv. 

Colos.      'Ot  av&pt$,  ayaxarc  raj   yvvauta;, 

EpllCS.  La  TtKva,  vita  overs  rots  yovtvaiv  v/xuv  tv  l\.vpt03'  tovto  yap  tart 
tiiicaiov. 

Colos.      Ta  TtKva,  vzaKOVSTC  rotj  yovcvoi  Kara  TravTa"   tovto  yap  taTtv  tvaptaro* 

Til)  Kvptfc). 

Ephes.      Kat  hi  Trartpcs,  fti]  iraonpyi^ert  ra  Ttuva  i/uov. 

Colos.      'Oi  Jrarrpcf,  /<i?  eoeOt^erc*  ra  Ttma  vjiiov. 

EpheS.      'Oi  ^ovXoi,  vrraxovtTB  rati  Kvptois  i.ura  oupk-u   ueraAoflov  Kai  Tpopov,ti' 

*  Trapopyt^cTc,  lectio  non  sperueiula  ;  Gricsbach. 


THE    ETI3TLE    TO    THE    EPHESIANS.  141 

unto  your  own  husbands,  as  it  is  fit  in  the  Lord.  Hus-; 
bands,  love  your  wives,  and  be  not  bitter  against  them. 
Children,  obey  your  parents  in  all  things,  for  this  is  well 
pleasing  unto  the  Lord.  Fathers,  provoke  not  your  chil- 
dren to  anger,  lest  they  be  discouraged.  Servants,  obey 
in  all  things  your  masters  according  to  the  flesh  :  not 
with  eye-service,  as  men-pleasers,  but  in  singleness  of 
heart,  fearing  God  ;  and,  whatever  ye  do,  do  it  heartily, 
as  to  the  Lord,  and  not  unto  men,  knowing  that  of  the 
Lord  ye  shall  receive  the  reward  of  the  inheritance;  for 
ye  serve  the  Lord  Christ.  But  he  that  doeth  wrong,  shall 
receive  for  the  wrong  which  he  hath  done  :  and  there  is 
no  respect  of  persons.  Masters,  give  unto  your  servants 
that  which  is  just  and  equal,  knowing  that  ye  also  have  a 
Master  in  heaven." 

The  passages  marked  by  Italics  in  the  quotation  from 
the  Ephesians  bear  a  strict  resemblance,  not  only  in  sig- 
nification, but  in  terms,  to  the  quotation  from  the  Colos- 
sians.  Both  the  words  and  the  order  of  the  words  are  in 
many  clauses  a  duplicate  of  one  another.  In  the  Epistle 
to  the  Golossians,  these  passages  are  laid  together ;  in 
that  to  the  Ephesians  they  are  divided  by  intermediate 
matter,  especially  by  a  long  digressive  allusion  to  the 
mysterious  union  between  Christ  and  his  Church  ;  which, 
possessing,  as  Mr.  Locke  hath  well  observed,  the  mind 
of  the  apostle,  from   being  an  incidental  thought,  grows 

azXorrtTi  rijf  Kdpiias  Vjiwv,  iLj  jtuXfuirw*  pjj  K<zr'  otpQa\poiov\tiav,  coj  avOpayra;  taxot^ 
aXX'  on  SovXoi  tov  Xpiorou,  ttoiovvtc;  to  dcXr/ua  tov  Qcovck  if/vvri;  jier'  cvvota;  Sov- 
Xcvovrct  di  ru  Ki'piw,  kui  owe  avOponots"  ciiorci  tin'  b  cav  ti  Uaaros  irair\o-j  ayaOov, 
iovto  Kopicirai  trapa  tov  Kupiov,  arc  Suv\o$,  are  eXcvOcpos. 

Coins.  "Oj  SovXoi,  v-ira/covcTC  K(iTa  iravra  rot;  Kara  capita  KVptoi;,urj  cv  ofdaX- 
l«oJou,\ciutc,  aij  avOpioTrapetTKoiy  a\X  cv  airXorqri  napSias,  (poftovuevot  tov  QtoV  xai 
rrav  6,  r:  cav  n-oiprt,  ck  ipv^ni  cpya$cjOc,>Ss  ru  KofKU,  vac  ovk  avOpuxois  adores  on 
otto  l\.vptov  airjXrjxptaOc  rnv  avTairoSoaiv  ttjs  tcXripovopias'  ra>  yap  YLvpia  Xptorcj 
£  .vXtvers* 


142  THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    EPHE3IANS. 

up  into  the  principal  subject.  The  affinity  between  these 
two  passages  in  signification,  in  terms,  and  in  the  order 
of  the  words,  is  closer  than  can  be  pointed  out  between 
any  parts  of  any  two  epistles  in  the  volume. 

If  the  reader  would  see  how  the  same  subject  is  treated 
by  a  different  hand,  and"  how  distinguishable  it  is  from 
the  production  of  the  same  pen,  let  him  turn  to  the  sec- 
ond and  third  chapters  of  the  First  Epistle  of  St.  Peter. 
The  duties  of  servants,  of  wives,  and  of  husbands,  are 
enlarged  upon  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians ;  but  the 
subjects  both  occur  in  a  different  order,  and  the  train  of 
sentiment  subjoined  to  each  is  totally  unlike. 

3.  In  twoletters  issuing  from  the  same  person,  nearly 
at  the  same  time,  and  upon  the  same  general  occasion, 
we  may  expect  to  trace  the  influence  of  association  in 
the  order  in  which  the  topics  follow  one  another.  Certain 
ideas  universally  or  usually  suggest  others.  Here  the 
order  is  what  we  call  natural,  and  from  such  an  order 
nothing  can  be  concluded.  But  when  the  order  is  arbi- 
trary,  yet  alike,  the  concurrence  indicates  the  effect  of 
that  principle  by  which  ideas  which  have  been  once 
joined  commonly  revisit  the  thoughts  together.  The 
epistles  under  consideration  furnish  the  two  following  re- 
markable instances  of  this  species  of  agreement. 

Ephes.  ch.  iv.  24.  "  And  that  ye  put  on  the  new  man. 
which  after  God  is  created  in  righteousness  and  true  ho- 
liness ;  wherefore;  putting  away  lying,  speak  every  man 
truth  with  his  neighbor,  for  we  are  members  one  of  an- 
other."* 

Colos.,  ch.  iii.  9.     "  Lie  not  one  to  another  ;  seeing  that 

*  Ephes.,  chap,  iv.,  24,  25.  Km  eviuaaaOai  Tov  Kaii'ov  avOpunroiy  rov  Kara 
Qsov  KTtaOcvTU  iv  iiKaioavi/T)  Kai  offiorijri  mi  aXz/Oimj"  iio  anut)t:ucv'>i  ru  ipsvSos, 
AaXcirt  aXijOctav  Ixauroj  /uni  roil  rA/jjioi'  airuv  on  tcpcr  aXXijAcov  /itA»j. 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    EPHESIANS.     '  143 

ye  have  put  off  the  old  man  with  his  deeds  ;  and  have 
put  on  the  new  man,  which  is  renewed  in  knowledge."* 

The  vice  of  "  lying,"  or  a  correction  of  that  vice,  does 
not  seem  to  bear  any  nearer  relation  to  the  "  putting  on 
the  new  man"  than  a  reformation  in  any  other  article 
of  morals.  Yet  these  two  ideas,  we  see,  stand  in  both 
epistles  in  immediate  connection. 

Ephes.,  ch.  v.  20,  21,  22.  "Giving  thanks  always  for 
all  things  unto  God  and  the  Father,  in  the  name  of  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ ;  submitting  yourselves  one  to  another, 
in  the  fear  of  God.  Wives,  submit  yourselves  unto  your 
own  husbands,  as  unto  the  Lord."f 

Colos.,  ch.  iii.  17.  "  Whatsoever  ye  do,  in  word  or 
deed,  do  all  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  giving  thanks 
to  God  and  the  Father  by  him.  Wives,  submit  your- 
selves unto  your  own  husbands,  as  it  is  fit  in  the  Lord."J 

In  both  these  passages  submission  follows  giving  of 
thanks,  without  any  similitude  in  the  ideas  which  should 
account  for  the  transition. 

It  is  not  necessary  to  pursue  the  comparison  between 
the  two  epistles  farther.  The  argument  which  results 
from  it  stands  thus:  No  two  other  epistles  contain  a  cir- 
cumstance which  indicntes  that  they  were  written  at  the 
same,  or  nearly  at  the  same,  time.  No  two  other  epis- 
tles exhibit  so  many  marks  of  correspondency  and  resem- 
blance.    If  the  original  which  we  ascribe  to  these  two 

*  Colos.,  chap,  iii.,  9.  M>j  ipcvlcaQc  zis  a\\ri\ovs,  a^CKOvaajicvoi  tov  iraKatov 
avOpwov,  ovv  rat;  rpa$cotv  avTOv,K<it  evSvoajievoi  tov  j>co»',  tov  avaKaivov/uvov  en 
firiyv&xny. 

t  Ephes.,  chap.  V.,  20,  31,  22.  Ei'^fipiorotiirrj  iravTorc  vvep  ttoivtoiv,  cv  ovo- 
ftaTi  tov  IVijJtou  qiKov  \n<rov  Koiotod,  lip  Qet>>  nat  irarpt,  vKOTCKTOOficvoi  aXXr/Xoij  cv 
<f>o0tj  Qtov.      Ai  yvvatices,  toi;  iSiots  avioaaiv  buoTaoacodc  6>i  tw  Knpio). 

X  Colos.,  chap,  iii.,  17.  K.at  nav  b,  ti  av  itatrjTt,  zv  Xuy*;1,  1  tv  cpyco,  navra 
cv  ovopaTi  K.upiou  Iqaov,  cv^apiarowTti  hj  Oc  >>  koi  xarot  11  avrov.  'A<  yviatxcs, 
VTorixaacoOe  Tots  iSioi;  avipaciv,  wj  airjuev  cv  Kv«i£>. 


144  THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    EPHESIANS. 

epistles  be  the  true  one,  that,  is,  if  they  were  both  really 
written  by  St.  Paul,  and  both  sent  to  their  respective 
destination  by  the  same  messenger,  the  similitude  is,  in 
all  points,  what  should  be  expected  to  take  place.  If 
they  were  forgeries,  then  the  mention  of  Tychicus  in  both 
epistles,  and  in  a  manner  which  shows  that  he  either  car- 
ried or  accompanied  both  epistles,  was  inserted  for  the 
purpose  of  accounting  for  their  similitude ;  or  else  the 
structure  of  the  epistles  was  designedly  adapted  to  the 
circumstance  :  or,  lastly,  the  conformity  between  the  con- 
tents of  the  forgeries  and  what  is  thus  directly  intimated 
concerning  their  date  was  only  a  happy  accident.  Not 
one  of  these  three  suppositions  will  gain  credit  with  a 
reader  who  peruses  the  epistles  with  attention,  and  who 
reviews  the  several  examples  we  have  pointed  out,  and 
the  observations  with  which  they  were  accompanied. 


No.  II.         / 

There  is  such  a  thing  as  a  peculiar  word  or  phrase 
cleaving,  as  it  were,  to  the  memory  of  a  writer  or  speaker, 
and  presenting  itself  to  his  utterance  at  every  turn. 
When  we  observe  this,  we  call  it  a  cant  word,  or  a  cant 
phrase.  It  is  a  natural  effect  of  habit ;  and  would  appear 
more  frequently  than  it  does,  had  not  the  rules  of  good 
writinfj  taught  the  ear  to  be  offended  with  the  iteration  of 
the  same  sound,  and  oftentimes  caused  us  to  reject,  on  that 
account,  the  word  which  offered  itself  first  to  our  recol- 
lection. With  a  writer  who,  like  St.  Paul,  either  knew 
not  these  rules,  or  disregarded  them,  such  words  will  not 
be  avoided.  The  truth  is,  an  example  of  this  kind  runs 
through  several  of  his  epistles,  and  in  the  epistle  before 
us  abounds ;  and  that  is  in  the  word  riches  (nlov-io;),  used 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    Tlltf    EPHESIAWS.  145 

metaphorically  as  an  augmentative  of  the  idea  to  which 
it  happens  to  be  subjoined.  Thus,  "  the  riches  of  his 
glory  ;"  "  his  riches  in  glory  ;"  "  riches  of  the  glory  of  his 
inheritance  ;"  "  riches  of  the  glory  of  this  mystery  :"  Rom., 
ch.  ix.  23;  Ephes.,  ch.  iii.  1G;  Ephes.,  ch.  i.  18;  Colos., 
ch.  i.  27 :  "  1'iches  of  his  grace,"  twice  in  the  Ephesians, 
ch.  i.  7.  and  ch.  ii.  7  ;  "  riches  of  the  full  assurance  of  un- 
derstanding," Colos.,  ch.  ii.  2;  "riches  of  his  goodness," 
Rom.,  ch.  ii.  4 ;  "  riches  of  the  wisdom  of  God,"  Rom., 
ch.  xi.  33 ;  "  riches  of  Christ,"  Ephes.,  iii.  8.  In  a  like 
sense  the  adjective,  Rom.,  ch.  x.  12,  "rich  unto  all  that 
call  upon  him;"  Ephes.,  ch.  ii.  4,  "inch  in  mercy;"  1 
Tim.,  ch.  vi.  18,  "  rich  in  good  works."  Also  the  ad- 
verb, Colos.,  ch.  iii.  16,  "let  the  work  of  Christ  dwell  in 
you  richly"  This  figurative  use  of  the  word,  though  so 
familiar  to  St.  Paul,  does  not  occur  in  any  part  of  the 
New  Testament,  except  once  in  the  Epistle  of  St.  James, 
ch.  ii.  5 ;  "  Hath  not  God  chosen  the  poor  of  this  world, 
rich  in  faith  ?"  where  it  is  manifestly  suggested  by  the 
antithesis.  I  propose  the  frequent,  yet  seemingly  unaf- 
fected, use  of  this  phrase,  in  the  epistle  before  us,  as  one 
internal  mark  of  its  genuineness. 


No.  III. 

There  is  another  singularity  in  St.  Paul's  style,  which, 
wherever  it  is  found,  may  be  deemed  a  badge  of  authen- 
ticity ;  because,  if  it  were  noticed,  it  would  not,  I  think, 
be  imitated,  inasmuch  as  it  almost  always  produces  em- 
barrassment and  interruption  in  the  reasoning.  This  sin- 
gularity is  a  species  of  digression  which  may  properly.  I 
think,  be  denominated  going  off  at  a  word.  It  is  turning 
aside  from  the  subject  upon  the  occurrence  of  some  par- 

7 


140  THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    EPHESIANS. 

ticular  word,  forsaking  the  train  of  thought  then  in  hand, 
and  entering  upon  a  parenthetic  sentence  in  which  that 
word  is  the  prevailing  term.  I  shall  lay  before  the  reader 
some  examples  of  this,  collected  from  the  other  epistles, 
and  then  propose  two  examples  of  it  which  are  found  in 
the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians.  2  Cor.,  ch.  ii.  14,  at  the 
word  savor:  "Now  thanks  be  unto  God,  which  always 
causeth  us  to  triumph  in  Christ,  and  maketh  manifest  the 
savor  of  his  knowledge  by  us  in  every  place,  (for  we  are 
unto  God  a  sweet  savor  of  Christ  in  them  that  are  saved, 
and  in  them  that  perish ;  to  the  one  we  are  the  savor:  of 
death  unto  death,  and  to  the  other  the  savor  of  life  unto 
life  ;  and  who  is  sufficient  for  these  things  ?)  For  we  are 
not  as  many  which  corrupt  the  word  of  God,  but  as  of 
sincerity,  but  as  of  God  ;  in  the  sight  of  God  speak  we  in 
Christ."  Again,  2  Cor.,  ch.  iii.  1,  at  the  word  epistle. 
"  Need  we,  as  some  others,  epistles  of  commendation  to 
you,  or  of  commendation  from  you?  (Ye  are  our  epistle 
written  in  our  hearts,  known  and  read  of  all  men ;  foras- 
much as  ye  are  manifestly  declared  to  be  the  epistle  of 
Christ,  ministered  by  us,  written  not  with  ink,  but  with 
the  Spirit  of  the  living  God  ;  not  in  tables  of  stone,  but 
in  the  fleshy  tables  of  the  heart.)"  The  position  of  the 
words  in  the  original  shows  more  strongly  than  in  the 
translation  that  it  was  the  occurrence  of  the  word  emoToXr] 
which  gave  birth  to  the  sentence  that  follows :  2  Cor.,  ch. 

iii.  1.  Ei  fii;  %Q>i'~°ut *',  wi  iwfiff,  ovoiuuxwv  enioiolwv  -nqogvuug, 
i]  e$  vuoit'  auOTattxwv  ;  t)  e.-iioroXi]  yiwc  ifiBtg  foif,  eyyeyoa/j/iievij 
tv  iixig  xuoduttg  f[(Mavt  VtVOHTMO/iSVjj  v.ui  umyuiooxouerij  ino  nav- 
tiav  ui'Ooumojf  Cfttvtquubvot,  vti  eerie  FmoioXij  Xoiotu  diuxovijQfioa 
i5<j>'  i\uo)>,t  fyyFyoituiiFvt]  o  flsXavtt  alia  nvevpuii,  Qeov  "Quito;-  ux 
sv  nXu^i  XiOivuiq,  u).V  bv  nXa^i  xaodiug  (ruyxiraig. 

Again,  2  Cor.,  ch.  iii.  12,  &c,  at  the  word  vail:  "  See- 
ing then  that  we  have  such  hope,  we  use  great  plainness 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    EPHESIATVS.  147 

of  speech :  and  not  as  Moses,  which  put  a  vail  over  his 
face,  that  the  children  of  Israel  could  not  steadfastly  look 
to  the  end  of  that  which  is  abolished.  But  their  minds 
were  blinded  ;  for  until  this  day  remaineth  the  same  vail 
untaken  away  in  the  reading  of  the  Old  Testament,  which 
vail  is  done  away  in  Christ ;  but  even  unto  this  day,  when 
Moses  is  read,  the  vail  is  upon  their  heart :  nevertheless, 
when  it  shall  turn  to  the  Lord,  the  vail  shall  be  taken 
away  (now  the  Lord  is  that  Spirit ;  and  where  the  Spirit 
of  the  Lord  is,  there  is  liberty.)  But  we  all  with  open 
face,  beholding  as  in  a  glass  the  glory  of  the  Lord,  are 
changed  into  the  same  image  from  glory  to  glory,  even 
as  by  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord.  Therefore,  seeing  we  have 
this  ministry,  as  we  have  received  mercy,  we  faint  not." 

Who  sees  not  that  this  whole  allegory  of  the  vail  arises 
entirely  out  of  the  occurrence  of  the  word,  in  telling  us 
that  "  Moses  put  a  vail  over  his  face,"  and  that  it  drew 
the  apostle  away  from  the  proper  subject  of  his  discourse, 
the  dignity  of  the  office  in  which  he  was  engaged  ;  which 
subject  he  fetches  up  again  almost  in  the  words  with 
which  he  had  left  it :  "  therefore,  seeing  that  we  have 
this  ministry,  as  we  have  received  mercy,  we  faint  not." 
The  sentence  which  he  had  before  been  going  on  with, 
and  in  which  he  had  been  interrupted  by  the  vail,  was, 
"  Seeing  then  that  we  have  such  hope,  we  use  great  plain- 
ness of  speech." 

In  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians,  the  reader  will  remark 
two  instances  in  which  the  same  habit  of  composition 
obtains:  he  will  recognize  the  same  pen.  One  he  will 
find,  chap.  iv.  8 — 11,  at  the  word  ascended :  M  Wherefore 
he  saith,  When  he  ascended  up  on  high,  he  led  captivity 
captive,  and  gave  gifts  unto  men.  (Now  that  he  as- 
cended, what  is  it  but  that  he  also  descended  first  unto  • 
the  lower  parts  of  the  earth  ?     He  that  descended  is  the 


148  THE    EPISTLE    TO    TIIE    EPHESIANS. 

same  alse  that  ascended  up  far  above  all  heavens,  that  he 
might  fill  all  things.)     And  he  gave  some  apostles,"  &c. 

The  other  appears,  chap.  v.  12 — 15,  at  the  word  light: 
"  For  it  is  a  shame  even  to  speak  of  those  things  which 
are  done  of  them  in  secret :  but  all  things  that  are  re- 
proved are  made  manifest  by  the  light :  for  whatsoever 
doth  make  manifest  is  light.  Wherefore  he  saith,  Awake, 
thou  that  sleepest,  and  arise  from  the  dead,  and  Christ 
shall  give  thee  light.  See  then  that  ye  walk  circum- 
spectly." 


No.  IV. 

Although  it  does  not  appear  to  have  ever  been  disputed 
that  the  epistle  before  us  was  written  by  St.  Paul,  yet  it 
is  well  known  that  a  doubt  has  long  been  entertained 
concerning  the  persons  to  whom  it  was  addressed.  The 
question  is  founded  partly  in  some  ambiguity  in  the  ex- 
ternal evidence.  Marcion,  a  heretic  of  the  second  cen- 
tury, as  quoted  by  Tertullian,  a  father  in  the  beginning 
of  the  third,  calls  it  the  Epistle  to  the  Laodiceans.  From 
what  we  know  of  Marcion,  his  judgment  is  little  to  be 
relied  upon  ;  nor  is  it  perfectly  clear  that  Marcion  was 
rightly  understood  by  Tertullian.  If,  however,  Marcion 
he  brought  to  prove  that  some  copies  in  his  time  gave  ev 
Aaodixetq  in  the  superscription,  his  testimony,  if  it  be  truly 
interpreted,  is  not  diminished  by  his  heresy;  for,  as  Gro- 
tius  observes,  "cur  m-d  re  mentiretur  nihil  end  causce. 
The  name  «''  A"</.'"<?,  in  the  first  verse,  upon  which  word 
singly  depends  the  proof  that  the  epistle  was  written  to 
the  Ephesians,  is  not  read  in  all  the  manuscripts  now  ex- 
tant. I  admit,  however,  that,  the  external  evidence  pre- 
ponderates with  a  manifest  excess  on  the  side  of  the  re- 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    EPHESIANS.        -  149 

ceived  reading.  The  objection,  therefore,  principally 
arises  from  the  contents  of  the  epistle  itself,  which,  in 
many  respects,  militate  with  the  supposition  that  it  was 
written  to  the  church  of  Ephesus.  According  to  the  his- 
tory, St.  Paul  had  passed  two  whole  years  at  Ephesus, 
Acts,  ch.  xix.  10.  And  in  this  point,  viz.  of  St.  Paul  hav- 
ing preached  for  a  considerable  length  of  time  at  Ephe- 
sus, the  history  is  confirmed  by  the  two  Epistles  to  the 
Corinthians,  and  by  the  two  Epistles  to  Timothy.  «  I  will 
tarry  at  Ephesus  until  Pentecost,"'  1  Cor.  ch.  xvi.  ver.  8. 
"  We  would  not  have  you  ignorant  of  our  trouble  which 
came  to  us  in  Asia,"  2  Cor.,  ch.  i.  8.  •■  As  I  besought 
thee  to  abide  still  at  Ephesus,  when  I  went  into  Macedo- 
nia," 1  Tim.,  ch.  i.  3.  "  And  in  how  many  things  he  min- 
istered unto  me  at  Ephesus  thou  knowegt  well,"  2  Tim., 
ch.  i.  18. f  I  adduce  these  testimonies,  because,  had  it 
been  a  competition  of  credit  between  the  history  and  the 
epistle,  I  should  have  thought  myself  bound  to  have  pre- 
ferred the  epistle.  Now,  every  epistle  which  St.  Paul 
wrote  to  churches  which  he  himself  had  founded,  or 
which  he  had  visited,  abounds  with  references,  and  ap- 
peals to  what  had  passed  during  the  time  that  he  was 
present  amongst  them  ;  whereas,  there  is  not  a  text  in 
the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians  from  which  we  can  collect 
that  he  had  ever  been  at  Ephesus  at  all.  The  two  Epis- 
tles to  the  Corinthians,  the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians,  the 
Epistle  to  the  Philippians,  and  the  two  Epistles  to  the 
Thessalonians,  are  of  this  class ;  and  they  are  full  of  al- 
lusions to  the  apostle's  history,  his  reception,  and  his  con- 
duct whilst  amongst  them  ;  the  total  want  of  which,  in  the 
epistle  before  us,  is  very  difficult  to  account  for,  if  it  was 
in  truth  written  to  the  church  of  Ephesus,  in  which  city 
he  had  resided  for  so  long  a  time.  This  is  the  first  and 
strongest  objection.     But  farther,  the  Epistle  to  the  Co- 


150  THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    EPHESIANS. 

lossians  was  addressed  to  a  church  in  which  St.  Paul  had 
never  been.  This  we  infer  from  the  first  verse  of  the 
second  chapter:  "for  I  would  that  ye  knew  what  great 
conflict  I  have  for  you  and  for  them  at  Laodicea,  and  for 
as  many  as  have  not  seen  my  face  in  the  flesh."  There 
could  be  no  propriety  in  thus  joining  the  Colossians  and 
Laodiceans  with  those  "  who  had  not  seen  his  face  in  the 
flesh,"  if  they  did  not  also  belong  to  the  same  description.* 
Now,  his  address  to  the  Colossians,  whom  he  had  not 
visited,  is  precisely  the  same  as  his  address  to  the  Chris- 
tians to  whom  he  wrote  in  the  epistle  which  we  are 
now  considering :  "  We  give  thanks  to  God  and  the 
Father  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  praying  always  for  you, 
since  ice  heard  of  your  faith  in  Christ  Jesus,  and  of  the 
love  which  ye  have  to  all  the  saints,"  Colos.,  ch.  i.  3. 
Thus,  he  speaks  to  the  Ephesians,  in  the  epistle  before  us, 
as  follows  :  "  Wherefore  I  also,  after  I  heard  of  your  faith 
in  the  Lord  Jesus,  and  love  unto  all  the  saints,  cease  not 
to  give  thanks  for  you  in  my  prayers,"  ch.  i.  15.  The 
terms  of  this  address  are  observable.  The  words,  "hav- 
ing heard  of  your  faith  and  love,"  are  the  very  words,  we 
see,  which  he  uses  towards  strangers  ;  and  it  is  not  prob- 
able that  he  should  employ  the  same  in  accosting  a  church 
in  which  he  had  long  exercised  his  ministry,  and  whose 
"  faith  and  love"  he  must  have  personally  known. f     The 

*  Dr.  Lardncr  contends  against  the  validity  of  this  conclusion;  but,  I 
think,  without  success.     Lardncr,  vol.  xiv.  p.  473.  edit.  1757. 

■f  Mr.  Locke  endeavors  to  avoid  this  difficulty,  by  explaining  "  their  faith , 
of  which  St.  Paul  had  heard,''  to  mean  the  steadfastness  of  their  persuasion 
that  they  were  called  into  the  kingdom  of  God,  without  subjection  to  the 
Mosaic  institution.  But  this  interpretation  seems  to  be  extremely  hard;  for, 
in  the  manner  in  which  faith  is  here  joined  with  love,  in  the  expression, 
,:  your  faith  and  love,"  it  could  not  be  meant  to  denote  any  particular  tenet 
which  distinguished  one  set  of  Christians  from  others ;  forasmuch  as  the 
expression  describes  the  general  virtues  of  the  Christian  profession. — Vide 
Locke  in  loc. 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    EPHESIANS.     .  151 

Epistle  to  the  Romans  was  written  before  St.  Paul  had 
been  at  Rome  ;  and  his  address  to  them  runs  in  the  same 
strain  with  that  just  now  quoted  :  "  I  thank  my  God 
through  Jesus  Christ,  for  you  all,  that  your  faith  is  spoken 
of  through  the  whole  world  :"  Rom.,  ch.  i.  8.  Let  us 
now  see  what  was  the  form  in  which  bur  apostle  was  ac- 
customed to  introduce  his  epistles,  when  he  wrote  to  those 
with  whom  he  was  already  acquainted.  To  the  Corin- 
thians, it  was  this  :  "I  thank  my  God  always  in  your  be- 
half, for  the  grace  of  God  which  is  given  you  by  Christ 
Jesus  :"  1  Cor.,  ch.  i.  4.  To  the  Philippians :  "  I  thank 
my  God  upon  every  remembrance  of  you  :"  Phil.,  ch.  i.  3. 
To  the  Thessalonians :  We  give  thanks  to  God  always  for 
you  all,  making  mention  of  you  in  our  prayers,  remem- 
bering without  ceasing  your  work  of  faith,  and  labor  of 
love :"  1  Thes.,  ch.  i.  3.  To  Timothy :  "  I  thank  God, 
whom  I  serve  from  my  forefathers  with  pure  conscience, 
that  without  ceasing  I  have  remembrance  of  thee  in  my 
prayers  night  and  day :"  2  Tim.,  ch.  i.  3.  In  these  quo- 
tations, it  is  usually  his  remembrance,  and  never  his  hear- 
ing, of  them,  which  he  makes  the  subject  of  his  thankful- 
ness to  God. 

As  great  difficulties  stand  in  the  way,  supposing  the 
epistle  before  us  to  have  been  written  to  the  church  of 
Ephesus,  so  I  think  it  probable  that  it  is  actually  the  Epis- 
tle to  the  Laodiceans,  referred  to  in  the  fourth  chapter  of 
the  Epistle  to  the  Colossians.  The  text  which  contains 
that  reference  is  this:  "When  this  epistle  is  read  among 
you,  cause  that  it  be  read  also  in  the  church  of  the  Laodi- 
ceans, and  that  ye  likewise  read  the  epistle  from  Laodi- 
cea,"  ch.  iv.  10.  The  " epistle  from  Loadicea"  was  an 
epistle  sent  by  St.  Paul  to  that  church,  and  by  them  trans- 
mitted to  Colosse.  The  two  churches  were  mutually  to 
communicate  the  epistles  they  had  received.     This  is  the 


152  THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    EPHESlANS. 

way  in  which  the  direction  is  explained  by  the  greater 
part  of  commentators,  and  is  the  most  probable  sense 
that  can  be  given  to  it.  It  is  also  probable  that  the  epis- 
tle alluded  to  was  an  epistle  which  had  been  received  by 
the  church  of  Laodicea  lately.  It  appears  then,  with  a 
considerable  degree  of  evidence,  that  there  existed  an 
epistle  of  St.  Paul's  nearly  of  the  same  date  with  the 
Epistle  to  the  Colossians,  and  an  epistle  directed  to  a 
church  (for  such  the  church  of  Laodicea  was,)  in  which 
St.  Paul  had  never  been.  What  has  been  observed  con- 
cerning the  epistle  before  us  shows  that  it  answers  per- 
fectly to  that  character. 

Nor  does  the  mistake  seem  very  difficult  to  account 
for.  Whoever  inspects  the  map  of  Asia  Minor  will  see 
that  a  person  proceeding  from  Rome  to  Laodicea  would 
probably  land  at  Ephesus,  as  the  nearest  frequented  sea- 
port in  that  direction.  Might  not  Tychicus  then,  in  pass- 
ing through  Ephesus,  communicate  to  the  Christians  of 
that  place  the  letter  with  which  he  was  charged  ?  And 
might  not  copies  of  that  letter  be  multiplied  and  preserved 
at  Ephesus?  Might  not  some  of  the  copies  drop  the 
words  of  designation  ev  ^  Aaodixeia*  which  it  was  of  no 

*  And  it  is  remarkable  that  there  seem  to  have  been  some  ancient  copies 
without  the  words  of  designation,  either  the  words  in  Ephesus,  or  the  words 
in  Tjii  ■  I    Basil,  a  writer  of  the  fourth  century,  speaking  of  the  pre- 

tias  this  very  singular  passage  :  "  And  writing  to  the  Ephesians, 
as  truly  united  to  him  .who  is  through  knowledge,  he  (Paul)  calleth  them 
in  a  \'  Baying  io  (Ik  saints  who  arc  and  (or<  r.  /;) 

the  fn  ■  tor  so  those  before  us  have  transmitted  it,  ami 

we  have  found  it  in  ancient  copies."  Dr.  Mill  interprets  (and  notwith- 
standing some  objections  that  have  been  made  to  him,  in  my  opinion  rightly 
interprets)  these  words  of  Basil,  as  declaring  that  this  father  had  seen  cer- 
tain copies  of  the  epistle  in  which  the  words,  :'  in  Ephesus,"  were  wanting. 
And  tin-  passage  I  think,  must  lie  considered  as  Basil's  fanciful  way  of  ex- 
plaining what  was  really  a  corrupt  and  d<  fective  reading;  for  I  do  not  be- 
lieve it  possible  that  Eh<  author  of  the  epi  lie  could  have  originally  written 
ayioi;  toh  vaiy,  without  any  name  of  place  to  follow  it. 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    EPHESIANS.  J 53 

consequence  to  an  Ephesian  to  retain  ?  Might  not  copies 
of  the  letter  come  out  into  the  Christian  church  at  large 
from  Ephesus  ;  and  might  not  this  give  occasion  to  a  be- 
lief that  the  letter  was  written  to  that  church?  And, 
lastly,  might  not  this  belief  produce  the  error  which  we' 
suppose  to  have  crept  into  the  inscription  ? 


No.  V. 

As  our  epistle  purports  to  have  been  written  during  St. 
Paul's  imprisonment  at  Rome,  which  lies  beyond  the  pe- 
riod to  which  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  brings  up  his  his- 
tory ;  and  as  we  have  seen  and  acknowledged  that  the 
epistle  contains  no  reference  to  any  transaction  at  Ephe- 
sus during  the  apostle's  residence  in  that  city,  we  cannot 
expect  that  it  should  supply  many  marks  of  agreement 
with  the  narrative.  One  coincidence  however  occurs, 
and  a  coincidence  of  that  minute  and  less  obvious  kind,' 
which,  as  hath  been  repeatedly  observed,  is  of  all  others' 
the  most  to  be  relied  upon. 

Chap.  vi.  19,  20,  We  read,  -praying  fbr  me,  that  I  may 
open  my  mouth  boldly,  to  make  known  the  mystery  of 
the  Gospel,  for  which  I  am  an  ambassador  in  bonds." 
"In  bonds;'  bv  dlvoei,  in  a  chain.     In  the  twentv-eighth 
chapter  of  the  Acts  we  are  informed  that  Paul,  after  his 
arrival  at  Rome,  was  suffered  to  dwell  by  himself  with  a 
soldier  that  kept  him.     Dr.Lardner  has  shown  that  this 
mode  of  custody  was  in  use  amongst  the  Romans,  and 
that,  whenever  it  was  adopted,  the  prisoner  was  bound  to 
the  soldier  by  a  single  chain:  in  reference  to  which  St 
Paul,  in  the  twentieth  verse  of  this  chapter,  tells  the  Jews, 
whom  he  had  assembled,  "For  this  cause  therefore  have 
I  called  for  you  to  see  you,  and  to  speak  with  you,  be- 

7* 


154         THE  EPISTLE  TO  THE  EPHESIANS. 

cause  that  for  the  hope  of  Israel  I  am  bound  with  this 
chain"  t^  dlvaiv  tuvxtjv  negixEijucn.  It  is  in  exact  con- 
formity, therefore,  with  the  truth  of  St.  Paul's  situation  at 
the  time,  that  he  declares  of  himself  in  the  epistle,  n^saSsvco 
ev  u).vaei.  And  the  exactness  is  the  more  remarkable,  as 
dlvaig  (a  chain)  is  nowhere  used  in  the  singular  number 
to  express  any  other  kind  of  custody.  When  the  pris- 
oner's hands  or  feet  were  bound  together,  the  word  was 
dsopot  (bonds),  as  in  the  twenty-sixth  chapter  of  the  Acts, 
where  Paul  replies  to  Agrippa,  "  I  would  to  God  that  not 
only  thou,  but  also  all  that  hear  me  this  day,  were  both 
almost  and  altogether  such  as  I  am,  except  these  bonds" 
TxccQExjog  x6)v  daofxiav  lovihiv.  When  the  prisoner  was  con- 
fined between  two  soldiers,  as  in  the  case  of  Peter, 
Acts,  chap.  xii.  6,  two  chains  were  employed  ;  and  it  is 
said  upon  his  miraculous  deliverance,  that  the  "  chains" 
(ulvoeig,  in  the  plural)  "  fell  from  his  hands."  deofiog,  the 
noun,  and  deofiai  the  verb,  being  general  terms,  were  ap- 
plicable to  this  in  common  with  any  other  species  of  per- 
sonal coercion  ;  but  &lvoigy  in  the  singular  number,  to  none 
but  this. 

If  it  can  be  suspected  that  the  writer  of  the  present 
epistle,  who  in  no  other  particular  appea'rs  to  have  availed 
himself  of  the  information  concerning  St.  Paul  delivered 
in  the  Acts,  had,  in  this  verse  borrowed  the  word  which 
he  read  in  that  book,  and  had  adapted  his  expression  to 
what  he  found  there  recorded  of  St.  Paul's  treatment  at 
Rome ;  in  short,  that  the  coincidence  here  noted  was  af- 
fected by  craft  and  design ;  I  think  it  a  strong  reply  to 
remark  that,  in  the  parallel  passage  of  the  Epistle  to  the 
Colossians,  the  same  allusion  is  not  preserved ;  the  words 
there  are,  "  praying  also  for  us,  that  God  would  open 
unto  us  a  door  of  utterance  to  speak  the  mystery  of  Christ, 
for  which  /  am  also  in  bonds"  dl  6  x«t  dsa/uui.     After  what 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    TIIE    EPHESIANS..  155 

has  been  shown  in  a  preceding  number,  there  can  be  lit- 
tle doubt  but  that  these  two  epistles  were  written  by  the 
same  person.  If  the  writer,  therefore,  sought  for,  and 
fraudulently  inserted  the  correspondency  into  one  epis- 
tle, why  did  he  not  do  it  in  the  other  ?  A  real  prisoner 
might  use  either  general  words  which  comprehended  this 
amongst  many  other  modes  of  custody  ;  or  might  use  ap- 
propriate words  which  specified  this,  and  distinguished  it 
from  any  other  mode.  It  would  be  accidental  which 
form  of  expression  he  fell  upon.  But  an  impostor,  who 
had  the  art,  in  one  place,  to  employ  the  appropriate  term 
for  the  purpose  of  fraud,  would  have  used  it  in  both  places. 


CHAPTER  VII 

THE  EPISTLE  TO  THE  PHILIPPIANS. 
No.    I. 

When  a  transaction  is  referred  to  in  such  a  manner  as 
that  the  reference  is  easily  and  immediately  understood 
by  those  who  are  beforehand,  or  from  other  quarters,  ac- 
quainted with  the  fact,  but  is  obscure,  or  imperfect,  or  re- 
quires investigation,  or  a  comparison  of  different  parts,  in 
order  to  be  made  clear  to  other  readers,  the  transaction 
so  referred  to  is  probably  real  ;  because,  had  it  been  fic- 
titious, the  writer  would  have  set  forth  his  story  more 
fully  and  plainly,  not  merely  as  conscious  of  the  fiction, 
but  as  conscious  that  his  readers  could  have  no  other 
knowledge  of  the  subject  of  his  allusion  than  from  the  in- 
formation of  which  he  put  them  in  possession. 

The  account  of  Epaphroditus,  in  the  Epistle  to  the 
Philippians,  of  his  journey  to  Rome,  and  of  the  business 
which  brought  him  thither,  is  the  article  to  which  I  mean 
to  apply  this  observation.  There  are  three  passages  in 
the  epistle  which  relate  to  this  subject.  The  first,  chap, 
i.  7 :  "  Even  as  it  is  meet  for  me  to  think  this  of  you  all, 
because  I  have  you  in  my  heart,  inasmuch  as  both  in  my 
bonds,  and  in  the  defence  and  confirmation  of  the  Gospel, 
ye  all  are  JroyxoMwo*  ftu  rtjg  #«oao?,  joint  contributors  to 
the  gift  which  I  have  received."*     Nothing  more  is  said 

*  Pearce,  I  believe,  was  the  first  commentator  who  gave  this  sense  to  the 
expression ;  and  I  believe,  also,  that  his  exposition  is  now  generally  assented 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    PHIUPPIANS.  157 

in  this  place.     In  the  latter  part  of  the  second  chapter, 
and  at  the  distance  of  half  the  epistle  from  the  last  quota- 
tion, the  subject  appears  again ;  "  Yet  I  supposed  it  ne- 
cessary to  send  to  you  Epaphroditus,  my  brother  and 
companion  in  labor,  and  fellow-soldier,  but  your  messen- 
ger, and  he  that  ministered  to  my  wants ;  for  he  longed 
after  you  all,  and  was  full  of  heaviness,  because  that  ye 
had  heard  that  he  had  been  sick :  for  indeed  he  was  sick 
nigh  unto  death ;  but  God  had  mercy  on  him,  and  not  on 
him  only,  but  on  me  also,  lest  I  should  have  sorrow  upon 
sorrow.     I  sent  him  therefore   the   more  carefully,  that 
when  ye  see  him  again  ye  may  rejoice,  and  that  I  may 
be  the  less  sorrowful.     Receive  him  therefore  in  the  Lord 
with  all  gladness ;  and  hold  such  in  reputation ;  because 
for  the  work  of  Christ  he  was  nigh  unto  death,  not  re- 
garding his  life  to  supply  your  lack  of  service  toward  me  ;" 
chap.  ii.  25—30.     The  matter  is  here  dropped,  and  no 
farther  mention  made  of  it  till  it  is  taken  up  near  the  con- 
clusion of  the  epistle  as  follows:  "But  I  rejoice  in  the 
Lord  greatly,  that  now  at  the  last  your  care  of  me  hath 
flourished  again,  wherein  ye  were  also  careful,  but  ye 
lacked  opportunity.      Not   that   I    speak  in  respect  of 
want;  for  I   have  learned,   in   whatsoever   state   I    am, 
therewith  to  be  content.     I  know  both  how  to  be  abased, 
and  I  know  how  to  abound:    everywhere,   and   in   all 
things,  I  am  instructed  both  to  be  full  and  to  be  hungry, 
both  to  abound,  and  to  suffer  need.     I  can  do  all  things 
through  Christ,  which  strengtheneth  me.     Notwithstand- 
ing, ye  have  well  done  that  ye  did  communicate  with  my 
affliction.     Now,  ye  Philippians,  know,  also,  that  in  the 

to.  He  interprets  in  the  same  sense  the  phrase  in  the  fifth  verse,  which  our 
translation  renders  "your  fellowship  in  the  Gospel;"  but  which  in  the  orig- 
inal IS  not  MIMWIf  ™  Evayytfun,  or  K0iV0H;?  cv  tu>  Euayytluy,  but  KOUWHf  cif 

To  EvayyiXnv. 


158  THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    PHILIPPIANS. 

beginning  of  the  Gospel,  when  I  departed  from  Macedo 
nia,  no  church  communicated  with  me,  as  concerning 
giving  and  receiving,  but  ye  only.  For  even  in  Thessa- 
lonica  ye  sent  once  and  again  unto  my  necessity.  No 
because  I  desire  a  gift ;  but  I  desire  fruit  that  may  abound 
to  your  account.  But  I  have  all,  and  abound  :  I  am  full, 
having  received  of  Epaphroditus  the  things  which  were 
sent  from  you :"  chap.  iv.  10 — 18.  To  the  Philippian 
reader,  who  knew  that  contributions  were  wont  to  be  made 
in  that  church  for  the  apostle's  subsistence  and  relief,  that 
the  supply  which  they  were  accustomed  to  send  to  him 
had  been  delayed  by  the  want  of  opportunity,  that 
Epaphroditus  had  undertaken  the  charge  of  conveying 
their  liberality  to  the  hands  of  the  apostle,  that  he  had  ac- 
quitted himself  of  this  commission  at  the  peril  of  his  life, 
by  hastening  to  Rome  under  the  oppression  of  a  grievous 
sickness  ;  to  a  reader  who  knew  all  this  beforehand,  every 
line  in  the  above  quotations  would  be  plain  and  clear. 
But  how  is  it  with  a  stranger  ?  The  knowledge  of  these 
several  particulars  is  necessary  to  the  perception  and  ex- 
planation of  the  references ;  yet  that  knowledge  must  be 
gathered  from  a  comparison  of  passages  lying  at  a  great 
distance  from  one  another.  Texts  must  be  interpreted 
by  texts  long  subsequent  to  them,  which  necessarily  pro- 
duces embarrassment  and  suspense.  The  passage  quoted 
from  the  beginning  of  the  epistle  contains  an  acknowl- 
edgment, on  the  part  of  the  apostle,  of  the  liberality  which 
the  Philippians  had  exercised  towards  him  ;  but  the  al- 
lusion is  so  general  and  indeterminate  that,  had  nothing 
more  been  said  in  the  sequel  of  the  epistle,  it  would  hardly 
have  been  applied  to  this  occasion  at  all.  In  the  sec- 
ond quotation,  Epaphroditus  is  declared  to  have  "  minis- 
tered to  the  apostle's  wants,"  and  "  to  have  supplied  their 
lack  of  service  towards  him  ;  but  how,  that  is,  at  whose 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    PHILIPPIANS.     -  159 

expense,  or  from  what  fund  he  "  ministered,"  or  what  was 
"the  lack  of  service  which  he  supplied,"  are  left  very 
much  unexplained,  till  we  arrive  at  the  third  quotation, 
where  we  find  that  Epaphroditus  "  ministered  to  St. 
Paul's  wants,"  only  by  conveying  to  his  hands  the  contri- 
butions of  the  Philippians ;  "  I  am  full,  having  received 
of  Epaphroditus  the  things  which  were  sent  from  you ;" 
and  that  "  the  lack  of  service  which  he  supplied"  was  a 
delay  or  interruption  of  their  accustomed  bounty,  occa- 
sioned by  the  want  of  opportunity :  "  I  rejoiced  in  the 
Lord  greatly  that  now  at  the  last  your  care  of  me  hath 
flourished  again ;  wherein  ye  were  also  careful,  but  ye 
lacked  opportunity."  The  affair  at  length  comes  out 
clear,  but  it  comes  out  by  piecemeal.  The  clearness  is 
the  result  of  the  reciprocal  illustration  of  divided  texts. 
Should  any  one  choose  therefore  to  insinuate  that  this 
whole  story  of  Epaphroditus,  or  his  journey,  his  errand, 
his  sickness,  or  even  his  existence,  might,  for  what  we 
know,  have  no  other  foundation  than  in  the  invention  of 
the  forger  of  the  epistle ;  I  answer,  that  a  forger  would 
have  set  forth  his  story  connectedly,  and  also  more  fully 
and  more  perspicuously.  If  the  epistle  be  authentic,  and 
the  transaction  real,  then  every  thing  which  is  said  con- 
cerning Epaphroditus,  and  his  commission,  would  be  clear 
to  those  into  whose  hands  the  epistle  was  expected  to 
come.  Considering  the  Philippians  as  his  readers,  a  per- 
son might  naturally  write  upon  the  subject,  as  the  authoi 
of  the  epistle  has  written ;  but  there  is  no  supposition  of 
forgery  with  which  it  will  suit. 

No.   II. 

The  history  of  Epaphroditus  supplies  another  observa- 
tion :  "  Indeed   he   was  sick,  nigh  unto  death  :  but  God 


160  THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    PHILIPPIANS. 

had  mercy  on  him,  and  not  on  him  only,  but  on  me  also 
lest  I  should  have  sorrow  upon  sorrow."  In  this  passage, 
no  intimation  is  given  that  Epaphroditus's  recovery  was 
miraculous.  It  is  plainly,  I  think,  spoken  of  as  a  natural 
event.  This  instance,  together  with  one  in  the  Second 
Epistle  to  Timothy  ("  Trophimus  have  I  left  at  Miletum 
sick,")  affords  a  proof  that  the  power  of  performing  cures, 
and,  by  parity  of  reason,  of  working  other  miracles,  was 
a  power  which  only  visited  the  apostles  occasionally,  and 
did  not  at  all  depend  upon  their  own  will.  Paul  undoubt- 
edly would  have  healed  Epaphroditus  if  he  could.  Nor, 
if  the  power  of  working  cures  had  awaited  his  disposal, 
would  he  have  left  his  fellow-traveller  at  Miletum  sick. 
This,  I  think,  is  a  fair  observation  upon  the  instances  ad- 
duced ;  but  it  is  not  the  observation  I  am  concerned  to 
make.  It  is  more  for  the  purpose  of  my  argument  to 
remark  that  forgery,  upon  such  an  occasion,  would  not 
have  spared  a  miracle ;  much  less  would  it  have  intro- 
duced St.  Paul  professing  the  utmost  anxiety  for  the  safety 
of  his  friend,  yet  acknowledging  himself  unable  to  help 
him  ;  which  he  does,  almost  expressly,  in  the  case  of 
Trophimus,  for  he  "left  him  sick;"  and  virtually  in  the 
passage  before  us,  in  which  he  felicitates  himself  upon 
the  recovery  of  Epaphroditus,  in  terms  which/almost  ex- 
clude the  supposition  of  any  supernatural  means  being 
employed  to  effect  it.  This  is  a  reserve  which  nothing 
but  truth  would  have  imposed. 


No.  III. 

Chap.  iv.  15,  1G.  "  Now,  ye  Philippians,  know,  also, 
that  in  the  beginning  of  the  Gospel,  when  I  departed  from 
Macedonia,  no  church  communicated  with  me,  as  con- 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    PIIILIPPIANS.  161 

cerning  giving  and  receiving,  but  ye  only.  For  even  in 
Thessalonica  ye  sent  once  and  again  unto  my  necessity." 
It  will  be  necessary  to  state  the  Greek  of  this  passage, 
because  our  translation  does  not,  I  think,  give  the  sense 
of  it  accurately. 

Oidaie  ds  xai  $lusig)  <In\innr)atoi,  6xi  sv  aqx7]  T»  EvayyeXiu,  ore 
e*i]Xdov  ixno  Maxedoviag,  udefiiu  uoi  exxlrjotu  exotrcovijoev,  etg 
Xoyov  dovewg  xat,  XrjipBwg,  ei  ftrj  tipeig [iovor  on  xai  e>  QeoaaXovtxT{ 
xai  d.T«|  xai  dig  eig  ir\v  ynetaf  (ioi  Bnsf.npuxs, 

The  reader  will  please  to  direct  his  attention  to  the  cor- 
responding particulars  o»  and  <5rt  xai,  which  connect  the 

Words   ev  oio/.rj  xii  EvayyeXiu,  ore  e$r]Xdot>  ano  Muxedonug,  with 

the  words  sv  06oouXovixrh  and  denote,  as  I  interpret  the 
passage,  two  distinct  donations,  or  rather,  donations  at 
two  distinct  periods,  one  at  Thessalonica,  unaS  xai,  dig,  the 
other  .after  his  departure  from  Macedonia,  ore  s$>/Xdov  ano 
Maxedoviag*  I  would  render  the  passage,  so  as  to  mark 
these  different  periods,  thus  :  "  Now,  ye  Philippians,  know, 
also,  that  in  the  beginning  of  the  Gospel,  when  I  was  de- 
parted from  Macedonia,  no  church  communicated  with 
me,  as  concerning  giving  and  receiving,  but  ye  only. 
And  that  also  in  Thessalonica  ye  sent  once  and  again  unto 
my  necessity."  Now,  with  this  exposition  of  the  passage, 
compare  2  Cor.,  chap.  xi.  8,9:  "I  robbed  other  churches, 
taking  wages  of  them  to  do  you  service.  And  when  I 
was  present  with  you,  and  wonted,  I  was  chargeable  to 
no  man  ;  for  that  which  was  lacking  to  me  the  brethren 
which  came  from  Macedonia  supplied." 

Luke,  chap,  ll.,  15.      Km  tycvcTo,  d>j  airri\Bov  orr    avrwv  et;  tov  ovpavov  bt 
ayyc\nt,  "  as  the  angels  were  gone  away,"  i.  e.,  after  their  departure,  &i  rro«- 

fitves  enrov   rrpos  oXXijXov,-.      Matt.,  chap,  xii.,  43.      '  Orav   it  to  anaQapTov  irvcvpa 

t$t\Qr)  a.-ro  tov  anOpomov,  when  the  unclean  spirit  is  gone,  i.e.,  after  his  de- 
parture, ittpxsrai-  John,  chap,  xiii.,  30.  'Ore  t^XOe  (Iotxtoj)  "  when  he 
was  gone,  i.  e.,  after  his  departure,  Xcyci  Ino-ovs.  Acts,  chap,  x.,  7,  U  6c  ai^X- 
Qtv  o  nyyrXij  6  XuXuv  Tp  KopviiXia,  "  and  when  the  angel  which  spake  unto 
him  was  departed,"  i.  e.  after  his  departure,  (pwwas  6vo  tuv  aiMrur,  &c. 


162  THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    PHILIPPIANS. 

It  appears  from  St.  Paul's  history,  as  related  in  the  Acts 
of  the  Apostles,  that,  upon  leaving  Macedonia,  he  passed, 
after  a  very  short  stay  at  Athens,  into  Achaia.  It  ap- 
pears, secondly,  from  the  quotation  out  of  the  Epistle  to 
the  Corinthians,  that  in  Achaia  he  accepted  no  pecuniary 
assistance  from  the  converts  of  that  country ;  but  that  he 
drew  a  supply  for  his  wants  from  the  Macedonian  Chris- 
tians. Agreeably  whereunto  it  appears,  in  the  third 
place,  from  the  text  which  is  the  subject  of  the  present 
number,  that  the  brethren  in  Philippi,  a  city  of  Macedo- 
nia, had  followed  him  with  their  munificence,  ore  e^ldov 
ano  Muxedoviag,  when  he  was  departed  from  Macedonia, 
that  is,  when  he  came  into  Achaia. 

The  passage  under  consideration  affords  another  cir- 
cumstance of  agreement  deserving  of  our  notice.  The 
gift  alluded  to  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Philippians  is  stated 
to  have  been  made  "  in  the  beginning  of  the  Gospel." 
This  phrase  is  most  naturally  explained  to  signify  the 
first  preaching  of  the  Gospel  in  these  parts  ;  viz.  on  that 
side  of  the  JEgean  Sea.  The  succors  referred  to  in  the 
Epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  as  received  from  Macedonia, 
are  stated  to  have  been  received  by  him  upon  his  first 
visit  to  the  peninsula  of  Greece.  The  dates  therefore 
assigned  to  the  donation  in  the  two  epistles  agree ;  yet, 
is  the  date  in  one  ascertained  very  incidentally,  namely, 
by  the  considerations  which  fix  the  date  of  the  epistle 
itself;  and  in  the  other  by  an  expression  (-'the  beginning 
of  the  Gospel")  much  too  general  to  have  been  used  if 
the  text  had  been  penned  with  any  view  to  the  corres- 
pondency we  are  remarking. 

Farther,  the  phrase,  "in  the  beginning  of  the  Gospel," 
raises  an  idea  in  the  reader's  mind  that  the  Gospel  had 
been  preached  there  more  than  once.  The  writer  would 
hardlv  have  called  the  visit  to  which  he  refers  the  "  bejrin- 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    PHIUPPIANS.  163 

ning  of  the  Gospel,"  if  he  had  not  also  visited  them  in 
some  other  stage  of  it.  The  fact  corresponds  with  this 
idea.  If  we  consult  the  sixteenth  and  twentieth  chapters 
of  the  Acts,  we  shall  find  that  St.  Paul,  before  his  impris- 
onment at  Rome,  during  which,  this  epistle  purports  to 
have  been  written,  had  been  twice  in  Macedonia,  and  each 
time  at  Philippi. 


No.  IV. 

That  Timothy  had  been  long  with  St.  Paul  at  Philippi 
is  a  fact  which  seems  to  be  implied  in  this  epistle  twice. 
First  he  joins  in  the  salutation  with  which  the  epistle 
opens:    "Paul   and    Timotheus,  the  servants   of    Jesus 
Christ,  to  all  the  saints  in  Christ  Jesus  which  are  at  Phi- 
lippi."    Secondly  and  more  directly,  the  point  is  inferred 
from  what  is  said  concerning  him,  chap.  ii.  19:  "But  I 
trust  in  the  Lord  Jesus  to  send  Timotheus  shortly  unto 
you,  that  I  also  may  be  of  good  comfort  when  I  know 
your  state ;  for  I  have  no  man  like  minded  who  will  nat- 
urally care  for  your  state ;  for' all  seek  their  own,  not  the 
things  which  are  Jesus  Christ's  ;  but  ye  know  the  proof  of 
him,  that  as  a  son  with  the  father  he  hath  served  with  me 
in  the  Gospel."     Had  Timothy's  presence  with  St.  Paul 
at  Philippi,  when  he  preached  the  Gospel  there,  been  ex- 
pressly remarked  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  this  quota- 
tion might  be  thought  to  contain  a  contrived  adaptation 
to  the  history ;  although,  even  in  that  case,  the  averment, 
or,  rather,  the  allusion,  in  the  epistle,  is  too  oblique  to  af- 
ford much  room  for  such  suspicion.     But  the  truth  is, 
that,  in  the  history  of  St.  Paul's  transactions  at  Philippi, 
which  occupies  the  greatest  part  of  the  sixteenth  chapter 
of  the  Acts,  no  mention  is  made  of  Timothy  at  all.     What 


164  THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    PHILIPPIANS. 

appears  concerning  Timothy  in  the  history,  so  far  as  re- 
lates to  the  present  subject,  is  this  :  "  When  Paul  came  to 
Derbe  and  Lystra,  behold,  a  certain  disciple  was  there, 
named  Timotheus,  whom  Paul  would  have  to  go  forth 
with  him."  The  narrative  then  proceeds  with  the  ac- 
count of  St.  Paul's  progress  through  various  provinces  of 
the  Lesser  Asia,  till  it  brings  him  down  to  Troas.  At 
Troas  he  was  warned  in  a  vision  to  pass  over  into  Ma- 
cedonia. In  obedience  to  which  he  crossed  the  iEgean 
Sea  to  Samothracia,  the  next  day  to  Neapolis,  and  from 
thence  to  Philippi.  His  preaching,  miracles,  and  perse- 
cutions at  Philippi,  follow  next ;  after  which  Paul  and 
his  company,  when  they  had  passed  through  Amphipolis 
and  Appollonia,  came  to  Thessalonica,  and  from  Thessa- 
lonica  to  Berea.  From  Berea  the  brethren  sent  away 
Paul ;  "  but  Silas  and  Timotheus  abode  there  still."  The 
itinerary  of  which  the  above  is  an  abstract  is  undoubt- 
edly sufficient  to  support  an  inference  that.  Timothy  was 
along  with  St.  Paul  at  Philippi.  We  find  them  setting 
out  together  upon  this  progress  from  Derbe,  in  Lycaonia; 
we  find  them  together  near  the  conclusion  of  it,  at  Berea, 
in  Macedonia.  It  is  highly  probable,  therefore,  that  they 
came  together  to  Philippi,  through  which  their  route  be- 
tween these  two  places  lay.  If  this  be  thought  probable 
it  is  sufficient.  For  what  I  wish  to  be  observed  is,  that, 
in  comparing,  upon  this  subject,  the  epistle  with  the  his- 
tory, we  do  not  find  a  recital  in  one  place  of  what  is  re- 
lated in  another;  but  that  we  find  what  is  much  more  to 
be  relied  upon,  an  oblique  allusion  to  an  implied  fact. 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    PHILIPPIANS.  165 


No.  V. 

Our  epistle  purports  to  have  been  written  near  the 
conclusion  of  St.  Paul's  imprisonment  at  Rome,  and  after 
si  residence  in  that  city  of  considerable  duration.  These 
circumstances  are  made  out  by  different  intimations,  and 
the  intimations  upon  the  subject  preserve  among  them- 
selves a  just  consistency,  and  a  consistency  certainly  un- 
meditated. First,  the  apostle  had  already  been  a  prisoner 
at  Rome  so  long  as  that  the  reputation  of  his  bonds,  and 
of  his  constancy  under  them,  had  contributed  to  advance 
the  success  of  the  Gospel :  "  But  I  would  ye  should  un- 
derstand, brethren,  that  the  things  which  happened  unto 
me  have  fallen  out  rather  unto  the  furtherance  of  the  Gos- 
pel ;  so  that  my  bonds  in  Christ  are  manifest  in  all  the 
palace,  and  in  all  other  places  ;  and  many  of  the  brethren 
in  the  Lord,  waxing  confident  by  my  bonds,  are  much 
more  bold  to  speak  the  word  without  fear."  Secondly, 
the  account  given  of  Epaphroditus  imports  that  St.  Paul, 
when  he  wrote  the  epistle,  had  been  in  Rome  a  consid- 
erable time :  "  He  longed  after  you  all,  and  was  full  of 
heaviness,  because  that  ye  had  heard  that  he  had  been 
sick."  Epaphroditus  was  with  St.  Paul  at  Rome.  He 
had  been  sick.  The  Philippines  had  heard  of  his  sick- 
ness, and  he  again  had  received  an  account  how  much 
they  had  been  affected  by  the  intelligence.  The  passing 
and  repassing  of  these  advices  must  necessarily  have  oc- 
cupied a  large  portion  of  time,  and  must  have  all  taken 
place  during  St.  Paul's  residence  at  Rome.  Thirdly,  af- 
ter a  residence  at  Rome  thus  proved  to  have  been  of  con- 
siderable duration,  he  now  regards  the  decision  of  his 
fate  as  nigh  at  hand.  He  contemplates  either  alterna- 
tive :  that  of  his  deliverance,  chap.  ii.  23  ;  "Him,  there- 


166  THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    PHILIPPIANS. 

fore,  (Timothy,)  I  hope  to  send  presently,  so  soon  as  I 
shall  see  how  it  will  go  with  me ;  but  I  trust  in  the  Lord 
that  I  also  myself  shall  come  shortly  :"  that  of  his  con- 
demnation, ver.  17  ;  "  Yea,  and  if  I  be  offered*  upon  the 
sacrifice  and  service  of  your  faith,  I  joy  and  rejoice  with 
you  all."  This  consistency  is  material,  if  the  considera- 
tion of  it  be  confined  to  the  epistle.  It  is  farther  material, 
as  it  agrees,  with  respect  to  the  duration  of  St.  Paul's  first 
imprisonment  at  Rome,  with  the  account  delivered  in  the 
Acts,  which,  having  brought  the  apostle  to  Rome,  closes 
the  history  by  telling  us  "  that  he  dwelt  there  two  whole 
years  in  his  own  hired  house." 


No.  VI. 

Chap.  i.  23.  "  For  I  am  in  a  strait  betwixt  two,  hav- 
ing a  desire  to  depart,  and  to  be  with  Christ ;  which  is  far 
better." 

With  this  compare  2  Cor.,  chap.  v.  8 :  "  We  are  confi- 
dent and  willing  rather  to  be  absent  from  the  body,  and 
to  be  present  with  the  Lord." 

The  sameness  of  sentiment  in  these  two  quotations  is 
obvious.  I  rely,  however,  not  so  much  upon  that,  as 
upon  the  similitude  in  the  train  of  thought  which  in  each 
epistle  leads  up  to  this  sentiment,  and  upon  the  suitable- 
ness of  that  train  of  thought  to  the  circumstances  under 
which  the  epistles  purport  to  have  been  written.  This,  I 
conceive,  bespeaks  the  production  of  the  same  mind,  and 
of  a  mind  operating  upon  real  circumstances.  The  sen- 
timent is  in  both  places  preceded  by  the  contemplation 
of  imminent   personal   danger.     To  the  Philippians  he 

*    AAA'  tl  Ktu  vrtviofiai  f-ri  rr)  Ovrriri  ri;?  tnartwi  !■  ;imv,  if  Hiy  blood   be   poured 

out  as  a  libation  ujion  the  bacrifice  of  your  faith. 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    PHILIPPIANS.  167 

writes,  in  the  twentieth  verse  of  this  chapter,  "  Accord- 
ing to  my  earnest  expectation  and  my  hope,  that  in  noth- 
ing I  shall  be  ashamed,  but  that  with  all  boldness,  as 
always,  so  now  also,  Christ  shall  be  magnified  in  my 
body,  whether  it  be  by  life  or  by  death."  To  the  Co- 
rinthians, u  Troubled  on  every  side,  yet  not  distressed  ; 
perplexed,  but  not  in  despair ;  persecuted,  but  not  forsa- 
ken ;  cast  down,  but  not  destroyed  ;  always  bearing  about 
in  the  body  the  dying  of  the  Lord  Jesus."  This  train  of 
reflection  is  continued  to  the  place  from  whence  the  words 
which  we  compare  are  taken.  The  two  epistles,  though 
written  at  different  times,  from  different  places,  and  to 
different  churches,  were  both  written  under  circumstan- 
ces which  would  naturally  recall  to  the  author's  mind  the 
precarious  condition  of  his  life,  and  the  perils  which  con- 
stantly awaited  him.  When  the  Epistle  to  the  Philippians 
was  written,  the  author  was  a  prisoner  at  Rome,  expect- 
ing his  trial.  When  the  Second  Epistle  to  the  Corin- 
thians was  written,  he  had  lately  escaped  a  danger  in 
which  he  had  given  himself  over  for  lost.  The  epistle 
opens  with  a  recollection  of  this  subject,  and  the  impres- 
sion accompanied  the  writer's  thoughts  throughout. 

I  know  that  nothing  is  easier  than  to  transplant  into  a 
forged  epistle  a  sentiment  or  expression  which  is  found 
in  a  true  one ;  or,  supposing  both  epistles  to  be  forged  by 
the  same  hand,  to  insert  the  same  sentiment  or  expression 
in  both.  But  the  difficulty  js  to  introduce  it  in  just  and 
close  connection  with  a  train  of  thought  going  before,  and 
with  a  train  of  thought  apparently  generated  by  the  cir- 
cumstances  under  which  the  epistle  is  written.  In  two 
epistles,  purporting  to  be  written  on  different  occasions, 
and  in  different  periods  of  the  author's  history,  this  pro- 
priety would  not  easily  be  managed. 


168  THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    PHILIPPIANS. 


No.   VII. 

Chap,  i.,  29,  39  ;  1,  2.  "For  unto  you  is  given,  in  the 
behalf  of  Christ,  not  only  to  believe  on  him,  but  also  to 
suffer  for  his  sake ;  having  the  same  conflict  which  ye 
saw  in  me,  and  now  hear  to  be  in  me.  If  there  be,  there- 
fore, any  consolation  in  Christ,  if  any  comfort  of  love,  if 
any  fellowship  of  the  Spirit,  if  any  bowels  and  mercies; 
fulfil  ye  my  joy,  that  ye  be  like-minded,  having  the  same 
love,  being  of  one  accord,  of  one  mind." 

With  this  compare  Acts,  xvi.  22 :  "  And  the  multitude 
(at  Philippi)  rose  up  against  them  (Paul  and  Silas) ;  and 
the  magistrates  rent  off  their  clothes,  and  commanded  to 
beat  them ;  and  when  they  had  laid  many  stripes  upon 
them,  they  cast  them  into  prison,  charging  the  jailer  to 
keep  them  safely ;  who  having  received  such  a  charge, 
thrust  them  into  the  inner  prison,  and  made  their  feet  fast 
in  the  stocks." 

The  passage  in  the  epistle  is  very  remarkable.  I  know 
not  an  example  in  any  writing  of  a  juster  pathos,  or  which 
more  truly  represents  the  workings  of  a  warm  and  affec- 
tionate mind,  than  what  is  exhibited  in  the  quotation  be- 
fore us.*  The  apostle  reminds  his  Philippians  of  their 
being  joined  with  himself  in  the  endurance  of  persecution 
for  the  sake  of  Christ.  He  conjures  them  by  the  ties  of 
their  common  profession  and  their  common  sufferings, 
"  to  fulfil  his  joy  :"  to  complete,  by  the  unity  of  their  faith, 
and  by  their  mutual  love,  that  joy  with  which  the  instan- 
ces he  had  received  of  their  zeal  and  attachment  had  in- 
spired his  breast.     Now  if  this  was  the  real  effusion  of  St. 

*  The  original  is  very  spirited:  Et  r«  nv  rapaxXijaif  tv  'X.pmrto,  tt  ti  rapariv 

iliov  uyuT/jf,  ti  rii   Kaivui'ia  IlvcvftOLTOt,  ci  Tiva   an\ixy^va  /cat   otKTip/iot.  nXjipuiaaTl 
fib  j^apav. 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    PHILIPPrANS.  169 

Paul's  mind,  of  which  it  bears  the  strongest  internal  char- 
acter, then  we  have  in  the  words,  "the  same  conflict 
which  ye  saw  in  me,"  an  authentic  confirmation  of  so 
much  of  the  apostle's  history  in  the  Acts  as  relates  to 
his  transactions  at  Philippi ;  and,  through  that,  of  the  in- 
telligence and  general  fidelity  of  the  historian. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

THE  EPISTLE  TO  THE  COLOSSIANS. 

No.   I. 

There  is  a  circumstance  of  conformity  between  St. 
Paul's  history  and  his  letters,  especially  those  which  were 
written  during  his  first  imprisonment  at  Rome,  and  more 
especially  the  epistles  to  the  Colossians  and  Ephesians, 
which  being  too  close  to  be  accounted  for  from  accident, 
yet  too  indirect  and  .latent  to  be  imputed  to  design,  can- 
not easily  be  resolved  into  any  other  original  than  truth. 
Which  circumstance  is  this,  that  St.  Paul,  in  these  epis- 
tles, attributes  his  imprisonment  not  to  his  preaching  of 
Christianity,  but  to  his  asserting  the  right  of  the  Gentiles 
to  be  admitted  into  it  without  conforming  themselves  to 
the  Jewish  law.  This  was  the  doctrine  to  which  he  con- 
sidered himself  a  martyr.  Thus,  in  the  epistle  before  us, 
chap.  i.  24,  (I  Paul)  "  who  now  rejoice  in  my  sufferings 
for  you" — "for  you,"  i.  e.  for  those  whom  he  had  never 
seen  :  for  a  few  verses  afterwards  he  adds,  '•  I  would  that 
ye  knew  what  great  conflict  1  have  for  you  and  for  them  at 
Laodicea,  and  for  as  many  as  have  not  seen  my  face  in  the 
flesh."  His  suffering  therefore  for  them  was,  in  their  gen- 
eral capacity  of  Gentile  Christians,  agreeably  to  what  he 
explicitly  declares  in  his  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians,  iv.  1 : 
"  For  this  cause  I  Paul,  the  prisoner  of  Jesus  Christ,  for 
you  Gentiles."  Again,  in  the  epistle  now  under  consid- 
eration, iv.  3 :  "  Withal  praying  also  for  us,  that  God 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    COLOSSIAX3.  171 

would  open  unto  us  a  door  of  utterance  to  speak  the  mys- 
tery of  Christ,  for  which  I  am  also  in  bonds."  What  that 
"  mystery  of  Christ"  was,  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians 
distinctly  informs  us :  M  Whereby  when  ye  read  ye  may 
understand  my  knowledge  in  the  mystery  of  Christ, 
which,  in  other  ages,  was  not  made  known  unto  the  sons 
of  men,  as  it  is  now  revealed  unto  his  holy  apostles  and 
prophets  by  the  Spirit,  that  the  Gentiles  should  be  fellow- 
heirs,  and  of  the  same  body,  and  partakers  of  his  promise 
in  Christ  by  the  Gospel.'7  This,  therefore,  was  the  con- 
fession for  which  he  declares  himself  to  be  in  bonds.  Now 
let  us  inquire  how  the  occasion  of  St.  Paul's  imprison- 
ment is  represented  in  the  history.  The  apostle  had  not 
long  returned  to  Jerusalem  from  his  second  visit  into 
Greecje,  when  an  uproar  was  excited  in  that  city,  by  the 
clamor  of  certain  Asiatic  Jews,  who,  "  having  seen  Paul 
in  the  temple,  stirred  up  all  the  people,  and  laid  hands  on 
him."  The  charge  advanced  against  him  was,  that  "  he 
taught  all  men  everywhere  against  the  people,  and  the 
law,  and  this  place ;  and,  farther,  brought  Greeks  also 
into  the  temple,  and  polluted  that  holy  place."  The  for- 
mer part  of  the  charge  seems  to  point  at  the  doctrine, 
which  he  maintained,  of  the  admission  of  the  Gentiles, 
under  the  new  dispensation,  to  an  indiscriminate  partici- 
pation of  God's  favor  with  the  Jews.  But  what  follows 
makes  the  matter  clear.  When;  by  the  interference  of 
the  chief  captain,  Paul  had  been  rescued  out  of  the  hands 
of  the  populace,  and  was  permitted  to  address  the  multi- 
tude who  had  followed  him  to  the  stairs  of  the  castle,  he 
delivered  a  brief  account  of  his  birth,  of  the  early  course 
of  his  life,  of  his  miraculous  conversion ;  and  is  proceed- 
ing in  this  narrative,  until  he  comes  to  describe  a  vision 
which  was  presented  to  him,  as  he  was  praying  in  the 
temple ;  and  which  bid  him  depart  out  of  Jerusalem, 


172  THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    COLOSSIANS. 

" for  I  will  send  thee  far  hence  unto  the  Gentiles"  Acts, 
xxii.  21.  "  They  gave  him  audience,"  says  the  historian, 
"unto  this  word;  and  then  lift  up  their  voices,  and  said, 
Away  with  such  a  fellow  from  the  earth  !"  Nothing  can 
show  more  strongly  than  this  account  does  what  was  the 
offence  which  drew  down  upon  St.  Paul  the  vengeance 
of  his  countrymen.  His  mission  to  the  Gentiles,  and  his 
open  avowal  of  that  mission,  was  the  intolerable  part  of 
the  apostle's  crime.  But,  although  the  real  motive  of  the 
prosecution  appears  to  have  been  the  apostle's  conduct 
towards  the  Gentiles  ;  yet,  when  his  accusers  came  before 
a  Roman  magistrate,  a  charge  was  to  be  framed  of  a 
more  legal  form.  The  profanation  of  the  temple  was  the 
article  they  chose  to  rely  upon.  This,  therefore,  became 
the  immediate  subject  of  Tertullus's  oration  before  Felix, 
and  of  Paul's  defence.  But  that  he  all  along  considered 
his  ministry  amongst  the  Gentiles  as  the  actual  source  of 
the  enmity  that  had  been  exercised  against  him,  and  in 
particular  as  the  cause  of  the  insurrection  in  which  his 
person  had  been  seized,  is  apparent  from  the  conclusion 
of  his  discourse  before  Agrippa :  "  I  have  appeared  unto 
thee,"  says  he,  describing  what  passed  upon  his  journey 
to  Damascus,  "  for  this  purpose,  to  make  thee  a  minister 
and  a  witness,  both  of  these  things  which  thou  hast  seen, 
and  of  those  things  in  the  which  I  will  appear  unto  thee, 
delivering  thee  from  the  people  and  from  the  Gentiles, 
unto  whom  now  I  send  thee,  to  open  their  eyes,  and  to 
turn  them  from  daikness  to  light,  and  from  the  power  of 
Satan  unto  God,  that  they  may  receive  forgiveness  of 
sins,  and  inheritance  among  them  which  are  sanctified  by 
faith  that  is  in  me.  Whereupon,  O  King  Agrippa,  I  was 
not  disobedient  unto  the  heavenly  vision  ;  but  showed 
first  unto  them  of  Damascus,  and  of  Jerusalem,  and 
throughout  all  the  coasts  of  Judea,  and  then  to  the  Gen- 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    COLOSSIANS.  I73 

tiles,  that  they  should  repent  and  turn   to  God,  and   dp 
works  meet  for  repentance.     For  these  causes  the  Jews 
caught  me  in  the  temple,  and   went  about  to  kill  me  " 
The  seizing,  therefore,  of  St.  Paul's  person,  from  which 
he  was  never  discharged  till  his  final  liberation  at  Rome  • 
and  of  winch,  therefore,  his  imprisonment  at  Rome  was' 
the  continuation  and  effect,  was  not  in  consequence  of 
any  general  persecution  set  on  foot  against  Christianity 
nor  d,d   it  befall  him  simply  as  professing  or  teaching 
Uinsts  religion,  which  James  arid  the  elders  at  Jerusa- 
lem did   as  well  as  he,  (and  yet,  for  any  thing  that  ap- 
pears, remained  at  that  time  unmolested)  ;  but  it  was  dis 
tinctly  and  specifically  brought  upon  him  by  his  activity 
m  preaching  to  the  Gentiles,  and  by  his  boldly  placing 
them  upon  a  level  with  the  once-favored   and  still   self- 
flattered  posterity  of  Abraham.     How  well  St.  Paul's  let 
ters,  purporting  to  be  written  during  this  imprisonment 
agree  with  this  account  of  its  cause  and  origin,  we  have' 
already  seen. 


No.  II. 

Chap.  iv.  10.  "Aristarchus,  my  fellow-prisoner,  sa- 
lutetfa  you,  and  Marcus,  sister's  son  to  Barnabas,  (touching 
whom  ye  received  commandments  :  If  he  come  unto  you" 
receive  hun  ;)  and  Jesus,  which  is  called  Justus,  who  are 
01  the  circumcision.'' 

We  find  Aristarchus  as  a  companion  of  our  apostle  in 
the  nineteenth  chapter  of  the  Acts,  and  the  twenty-ninth 
verse:  And  the  whole  city  of  Ephesus  was  filled  with 
confusion  •  and  having  caught  Gains  and  Aristarchus,  men 
of  Macedonia,  PauVs  companions  in  (rare,,  they  rushed 
With  one  accord  into  the  theatre."     And  we  find  him 


174  THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    COLOSSIANS. 

upon  his  journey  with  St.  Paul  to  Rome,  in  the  twenty- 
seventh  chapter,  and  the  second  verse :  "  And  when  it 
was  determined  that  we  should  sail  into  Italy,  they  de- 
livered Paul  and  certain  other  prisoners  unto  one  named 
Julius,  a  centurion  of  Augustus's  bund  :  and,  entering  into 
a  ship  of  Adrnmyttium,  we  launched,  meaning  to  sail  by 
the  coast  of  Asia ;  one  Aristarchus,  a  Macedonian  of 
Tliessalonica,  being  with  us."  But  might  not  the  author 
of  the  epistle  have  consulted  the  history ;  and,  observing 
that  the  historian  had  brought  Aristarchus  along  with 
Paul  to  Rome,  might  he  not  for  that  reason,  and  without 
any  other  foundation,  have  put  down  his  name  amongst 
the  salutations  of  an  epistle  purporting  to  be  written  by 
the  apostle  from  that  place  ?  I  allow  so  much  of  possi- 
bility to  this  objection  that  I  should  not  have  proposed 
this  in  the  number  of  coincidences  clearly  undesigned, 
had  Aristarchus  stood  alone.  The  observation  that  strikes 
me  in  reading  the  passage  is,  that,  together  with  Aristar- 
chus, whose  journey  to  Rome  we  trace  in  the  history,  are 
joined  Marcus  and  Justus,  of  whose  coming  to  Rome  the 
history  says  nothing.  Aristarchus  alone  appears  in  the 
history,  and  Aristarchus  alone  would  have  appeared  in 
the  epistle,  if  the  author  had  regulated  himself  by  that 
conformity.  Or,  if  you  take  it  the  other  way ;  if  you 
suppose  the  history  to  have  been  made  out  of  the  epistle, 
why  the  journey  of  Aristarchus  to  Rome  should  be  re- 
corded, and  not  that  of  Marcus  and  Justus,  if  the  ground- 
work of  the  narrative  was  the  appearance  of  Aristar- 
chus's  name  in  the  epistle,  seems  to  be  unaccountable. 

'•  Marcus,  sister's  son  to  Barnabas."  Does  not  this  hint 
account  for  Barnabas's  adherence  to  Mark  in  the  contest 
that  arose  with  our  apostle  concerning  him  ?  "  And  some 
days  after  Paul  said  unto  Barnabas.  Let  us  go  again  and 
visit  our  bretlu-en  in  every  city  where  we  have  preached 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    COLOSSIANS.  175 

the  word  of  the  Lord,  and  see  how  they  do ;  and  Barna- 
bas determined  to  take  with  them  John,  whose  surname  icds 
Marfc ;  but  Paul  thought  not  good  to  take  him  with  them, 
who  departed  from  Pamphylia,  and  went  not  with  them 
to  the  work ;  and  the  contention  was  so  sharp  between 
them  that  they  departed  asunder  one  from  the  other :  and 
so  Barnabas  took  Mark  and  sailed  unto  Cyprus."  The 
history  which  records  the  dispute  has  not  preserved  the 
circumstance  of  Mark's  relationship  to  Barnabas.  It  is 
nowhere  noticed  but  in  the  text  before  us.  As  far,  there- 
fore, as  it  applies,  the  application  is  certainly  undesigned. 
"  Sister's  son  to  Barnabas."  This  woman,  the  mother 
of  Mark,  and  the  sister  of  Barnabas,  was,  as  might  be  ex- 
pected, a  person  of  some  eminence  amongst  the  Chris- 
tians of  Jerusalem.  It  so  happens  that  we  hear  of  her 
in  the  history.  "  When  Peter  was  delivered  from  prison, 
he  came  to  the  house  of  Mary  the  mother  of  John,  whose 
surname  was  Mark,  where  many  were  gathered  together 
praying."  Acts.,  xii.  12.  There  is  somewhat  of  coinci- 
dence in  this  ;  somewhat  bespeaking  real  transactions 
amongst  real  persons. 


No.  III. 

The  following  coincidence,  though  it  bear  the  appear- 
ance of  great  nicety  and  refinement,  ought  not,  perhaps, 
to  be  deemed  imaginary.  In  the  salutations  with  which 
this,  like  most  of  St.  Paul's  epistles,  concludes,  "  we  have 
Aristarchus,  and  Marcus,  and  Jesus,  which  is  called  Jus- 
tus, who  are  of  the  cirewncision,"'  iv.  10,  11.  Then  fol- 
low also,  "  Epaphras,  Luke,  the  beloved  physician,  and 
Demas."  Now  as  this  description,  "  who  are  of  the  cir- 
cumcision,'' is  added  after  the  first  three  names,  it  is  in- 


176  THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    COLOSSIANS. 

ferred,  not  without  great  appearance  of  probability,  that 
the  rest,  amongst  whom  is  Luke,  were  not  of  the  circum- 
cision. Now,  can  we  discover  any  expression  in  the 
Acts  of  the  Apostles  which  ascertains  whether  the  author 
of  the  book  was  a  Jew  or  not  ?  If  we  can  discover  that 
he  was  not  a  Jew,  we  fix  a  circumstance  in  his  character 
which  coincides  with  what  is  here,  indirectly  indeed,  but 
not  very  uncertainly,  intimated  concerning  Luke :  and 
we  so  far  confirm  both  the  testimony  of  the  primitive 
church,  that  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  was  written  by  St. 
Luke,  and  the  general  reality  of  the  persons  and  circum- 
stances brought  together  in  this  epistle.  The  text  in  the 
Acts,  which  has  been  construed  to  show  that  the  writer 
was  not  a  Jew,  is  the  nineteenth  verse  of  the  first  chapter, 
where,  in  describing  the  field  which  had  been  purchased. 
with  the  reward  of  Judas's  iniquity,  it  is  said  "that  it  was 
known  unto  all  the  dwellers  at  Jerusalem ;  insomuch  as 
that  field  is  called  in  their  proper  tongue,  Aceldama, 
that  is  to  say,  The  field  of  blood."  These  words  are  by 
most  commentators  taken  to  be  the  words  and  observa- 
tion of  the  historian,  and  not  a  part  of  St.  Peter's  speech, 
in  the  midst  of  which  they  are  found.  If  this  be  admit- 
ted, then  it  is  argued  that  the  expression,  "  in  their  proper 
tongue,"  would  not  have  been  used  by  a  Jew,  but  is  suit- 
able to  the  pen  of  a  Gentile  writing  concerning  Jews.*' 
The  reader  will  judge  of  the  probability  of  this  conclu- 
sion, and  we  urge  the  coincidence  no  farther  than  that 
probability  extends.  The  coincidence,  if  it  be  one,  is  so 
remote  from  all  possibility  of  design  that  nothing  need  be 
added  to  satisfy  the  reader  upon  that  part  of  the  argu- 
ment. 

*  Vide  Eenson's  Dissertation,  vol.  i.  p.  318,  of  his  works,  cd.  175G. 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    COLOSSIANS  177 


No.  IV. 

Chap.  iv.  9.  "  With  Onesimus,  a  faithful  and  beloved 
brother,  who  is  one  of  you." 

Observe  how  it  may  be  made  out  that  Onesimus  w  i 
a  Colossian.  Turn  to  the  Epistle  to  Philemon,  and  you 
will  find  that  Onesimus  was  the  servant  or  slave  of  Phile- 
mon. The  question  therefore  will  be,  to  what  city  Phile- 
mon belonged.  In  the  epistle  addressed  to  him  this  is 
not  declared.  It  appears  only  that  he  was  of  the  same 
place,  whatever  that  place  was,  with  an  eminent  Christian 
named  Archippus.  "  Paul,  a  prisoner  of  Jesus  Christ, 
and  Timothy  our  brother,  unto  Philemon  our  dearly  be- 
loved and  fellow-laborer ;  and  to  our  beloved  Apphia, 
and  Archippus  our  fellow-soldier,  and  to  the  church  in 
thy  house."  Now  turn  back  to  the  Epistle  to  the  Co- 
lossians,  and  you  will  find  Archippus  saluted  by  name 
amongst  the  Christians  of  that  church.  "  Say  to  Archip- 
pus, Take  heed  to  the  ministry  which  thou  hast  received 
in  the  Lord,  that  thou  fulfil  it:"  iv.  17.  The  necessary 
result  is,  that  Onesimus  also  was  of  the  same  city,  agree- 
ably to  what  is  said  of  him,  "  he  is  one  of  you."  And 
this  result  is  the  effect  either  of  truth,  which  produces 
consistency  without  the  writer's  thought  or  care,  or  of  a 
contexture  of  forgeries  confirming  and  falling  in  with  one 
another  by  a  species  of  fortuity  of  which  I  know  no  ex- 
ample. The  supposition  of  design,  I  think,  is  excluded, 
not  only  because  the  purpose  to  which  the  design  must 
have  been  directed,  viz.  the  verification  of  the  passage  in 
our  epistle,  in  which  it  is  said  concerning  Onesimus,  "  he 
is  one  of  you,"  is  a  purpose  which  would  be  lost  upon 
ninety-nine  readers  out  of  a  hundred ;  but  because  the 
means  made  use  of  are  too  circuitous  to  have  been  the 


178  THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    COLOSSIANS. 

subject  of  affectation  and  contrivance.  Would  a  forger, 
who  had  this  purpose  in  view,  have  left  his  readers  to  hunt 
it  out,  by  going  forward  and  backward  from  one  epistle 
to  another,  in  order  to  connect  Onesimus  with  Philemon, 
Philemon  with  Archippus,  and  Archippus  with  Colosse  ? 
all  which  he  must  do  before  he  arrives  at  his  discovery, 
that  it  was  truly  said  of  Onesimus,  "  he  is  one  of  you." 


CHAPTER  IX. 

THE  FIRST  EPISTLE  TO  THE  THESSALONIANS. 
No.   I. 

It  is  known  to  every  reader  of  Scripture  that  the  First 
Epistle  to  the  Thessalonians  speaks  of  the  coming  of 
Christ  in  terms  which  indicate  an  expectation  of  his  speedy 
appearance :  "  For  this  we  say  unto  you  by  the  word  of 
the  Lord,  that  we  which  are  alive  and  remain  unto  the 
coming  of  the  Lord  shall  not  prevent  them  which  are 
asleep.  For  the  Lord  himself  shall  descend  from  heaven 
with  a  shout,  with  the  voice  of  the  archangel,  and  with 
the  trump  of  God  ;  and  the  dead  in  Christ  shall  rise  first : 
then  we  ivhich  are  alive  and  remain  shall  be  caught  up 
together  with  them  in  the  clouds.— But  ye,  brethren,  are 
not  in  darkness,  that  that  day  should  overtake  you  as  a 
thief."     Chap.  iv.  15,  16,  17;  chap.  v.  4. 

Whatever  other  construction  these  texts  may  bear,  the 
idea  they  leave  upon  the  mind  of  an  ordinary  reader  is 
that  of  the  author  of  the  epistle  looking  for  the  day  of 
judgment  to  take  place  in  his  own  time,  or  near  to  it. 
Now  the  use  which  I  make  of  this  circumstance  is  to  de- 
duce from  it  a  proof  that  the  epistle  itself  was  not  the  pro- 
duction of  a  subsequent  age.  Would  an  impostor  have 
given  this  expectation  to  St.  Paul,  after  experience  had 
proved  it  to  be  erroneous  ?  or  would  he  have  put  into 
the  apostle's  mouth,  or,  which  is  the  same  thing,  into  writ- 
ings purporting  to  come  from   his  hand,  expressions,  if 


180         THE    FIRST    EPISTLE    TO    THE    THESSALONIANS. 

not  necessarily  conveying,  at  least  easily  interpreted  to 
convey,  an  opinion  which  was  then  known  to  be  founded 
in  mistake  ?  I  state  this  as  an  argument  to  show  that  the 
epistle  was  contemporary  with  St.  Paul,  which  is  little 
less  than  to  show  that  it  actually  proceeded  from  his  pen. 
For  I  question  whether  any  ancient  forgeries  were  exe- 
cuted in  the  lifetime  of  the  person  whose  name  they  bear  ; 
nor  was  the  primitive  situation  of  the  church  likely  to 
give  birth  to  such  an  attempt. 


No.  II. 

Our  epistle  concludes  with  a  direction  that  it  should 
be  publicly  read  in  the  church  to  which  it  was  addressed : 
"  I  charge  you  by  the  Lord  that  this  epistle  be  read  unto 
all  the  holy  brethren."  The  existence  of  this  clause  in  the 
body  of  the  epistle  is  an  evidence  of  its  authenticity  ;  be- 
cause to  produce  a  letter  purporting  to  have  been  pub- 
licly read  in  the  church  of  Thessalonica,  when  no  such 
letter  in  truth  had  been  read  or  heard  of  in  that  church, 
would  be  to  produce  an  imposture  destructive  of  itself. 
At  least,  it  seems  unlikely  that  the  author  of  an  impos- 
ture would  voluntarily,  and  even  officiously,  afford  a  han- 
dle to  so  plain  an  objection.  Either  the  epistle  was  pub- 
licly read  in  the  church  of  Thessalonica  during  St.  Paul's 
lifetime,  or  it  was  not.  If  it  was,  no  publication  could  be 
more  authentic,  no  species  of  notoriety  more  unquestion- 
able, no  method  of  preserving  the  integrity  of  the  copy 
more  secure.  If  it  was  not,  the  clause  we  produce  would 
remain  a  standing  condemnation  of  the  forgery,  and  one 
would  suppose,  an  invincible  impediment  to  its  success. 

If  we  connect  this  article  with  the  preceding,  we  shall 
perceive  that  they  combine  into  one  strong  proof  of  the 


THE    FIRST    EPISTLE    TO    THE    TIIES3ALOXIA1VS.  181 

genuineness  of  the  epistle.     The  preceding  article  carries 
up  the  date  of  the  epistle  to  the  time  of  St.  Paul ;  the 
present  article  fixes  the  publication  of  it  to  the  church  of 
Thessalonica.     Either,  therefore,  the  church  of  Thessa- 
lonica was  imposed  upon  by  a  false  epistle,  which  in  St. 
Paul's  lifetime  they  received  and  read  publicly  as  his,  car- 
rying on  a  communication  with  him  all  the  while,  and 
the  epistle  referring  to  the  continuance  of  that  communi- 
cation: or  other  Christian  churches,  in  the  same  lifetime 
of  the  apostle,  received  an  epistle  purporting  to  have 
been  publicly  read  in  the  church  of  Thessalonica,  which 
nevertheless  had  not  been  heard  of  in  that  church ;  or, 
lastly,  the  conclusion  remains,  that  the  epistle  now  in  our 
hands  is  genuine. 

No.  III. 

Between  our  epistle  and  the  history  the  accordancy, 
in  many  points,  is  circumstantial  and  complete.     The  his- 
tory relates  that,  after  Paul  and  Silas  had  been  beaten 
with  many  stripes  at  Philippi,  shut  up  in  the  inner  prison, 
and  their  feet  made  fast  in  the  stocks,  as  soon  as  they 
were  discharged  from  their  confinement,  thev  departed 
from  thence,  and,  when  they  had  passed  through  Am- 
phipolis    and  Apollonia,,  came  to    Thessalonica?  where 
I  aul  opened  and  alleged  that  Jesus  was  the  Christ :  Acts, 
xvi.  23,  &c.     The  epistle,  written  in  the  name  of  Paul' 
and  Silvanus  (Silas),  and  of  Timothcus,  who  also  appears 
to  have  been  along  with  them  at  Philippi,  (vide  Phil.  No 
iv.),  speaks  to  the  church  of  Thessalonica  thus  :  "Even 
after  that  we  had  suffered  before,  and  were  shamefully 
entreated,  as  ye  know,  at  Philippi,  we  were  bold  in  our 
God  to  speak  unto  you  the  Gospel  of  God  with  much  con- 
tention :"  chap.  ii.  2. 


182         THE    FIRST    EPISTLE    TO    THE    THESSALONIANS. 

The  history  relates  that,  after  they  had  been  some  time 
at  Thessalonica,  "the  Jews  who  believed  not  set  all  the 
city  in  an  uproar,  and  assaulted  the  house  of  Jason,  where 
Paul  and  Silas  were,  and  sought  to  bring  them  out  to  the 
people :"  Acts,  xvii.  5.  The  epistle  declares,  "  when  we 
were  with  you,  we  told  you  before  that  we  should  suffer 
tribulation  ;  even  as  it  came  to  pass,  and  ye  know :"  iii.  4, 

The  history  brings  Paul,  and  Silas,  and  Timothy  to- 
gether at  Corinth,  soon  after  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel 
at  Thessalonica :  "  And  when  Silas  and  Timotheus  were 
come  from  Macedonia  (to  Corinth),  Paul  was  pressed  in 
spirit :"  Acts,  xviii.  5.  The  epistle  is  written  in  the  name 
of  these  three  persons,  who  consequently  must  have  been 
together  at  the  time,  and  speaks  throughout  of  their  min- 
istry at  Thessalonica  as  a  recent  transaction  :  "  We,  breth- 
ren, being  taken  from  you  for  a  short  time,  in  presence 
not  in  heart,  endeavoring  the  more  abundantly  to  see 
your  face,  with  great  desire:"  ii.  17. 

The  harmony  is  indubitable ;  but  the  points  of  history 
in  which  it  consists  are  so  expressly  set  forth  in  the  nar- 
rative, and  so  directly  referred  to  in  the  epistle,  that  it 
becomes  necessary  for  us  to  show  that  the  facts  in  one 
writing  were  not  copied  from  the  other.  Now,  amidst 
some  minuter  discrepancies,  which  will  be  noticed  below, 
there  is  one  circumstance  which  mixes  itself  with  all  the 
allusions  in  the  epistle,  but  does  not  appear  in  the  history 
anywhere  ;  and  that  is,  of  a  visit  which  St.  Paul  had  in- 
tended to  pay  to  the  Thessalonians  during  the  time  of  his 
residing  at  Corinth:  " Wherefore  we  would  have  come 
unto  you  (even  I  Paul)  once  and  again  ;  but  Satan  hin- 
dered us:"  ii.  18.  "Night  and  day  praying  exceedingly 
that  we  might  see  your  face,  and  might  perfect  that 
which  is  lacking  in  your  faith.  Now  God  himself  and 
our  Father,  and  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  direct  our  way 


THE    FIRST    EPISTLE    TO    THE    THESSALONIANS.  183 

unto  you:"  iii.  10,  11.  Concerning  a  design  which  was 
not  executed,  although  the  person  himself,  who  was  con. 
scious  of  his  own  purpose,  should  make  mention  in  his 
letters,  nothing  is  more  probahle  than  that  his  historian 
should  be  silent,  if  not  ignorant.  The  author  of  the  epis- 
tle could  not,  however,  have  ^learnt  this  circumstance 
from  the  history,  for  it  is  not  there  to  be  met  with  ;  nor, 
if  the  historian  had  drawn  his  materials  from  the  epistle, 
is  it  likely  that  he  would  have  passed  over  a  circumstance, 
which  is  amongst  the  most  obvious  and  prominent  of  the 
facts  to  be  collected  from  that  source  of  information. 


No.  IV. 

Chap,  iii.,1 — 7.  "  Wherefore,  when  we  could  no  longer 
forbear,  we  thought  it  good  to  be  left  at  Athens  alone,  and 
sent  Timotheus,  our  brother,  and  minister  of  God,  to 
establish  you,  and  to  comfort  you  concerning  your  faith  ; — 
but  now  when  Timotheus  came  from  you  unto  us,  and 
brought  us  good  tidings  of  your  faith  and  charity,  we 
were  comforted  over  you  in  all  our  affliction  and  distress 
by  your  faith." 

The  history  relates  that,  when  Paul  came  out  of  Mace- 
donia to  Athens,  Silas  and  Timothy  staid  behind  at  Berea : 
"  the  brethren  sent  away  Paul  to  go  as  it  were  to  the  sea ; 
but  Silas  and  Timotheus  abode  there  still  ;  and  they  that 
conducted  Paul  brought  him  to  Athens."  Acts,  chap, 
xvii.  14,  15.  The  history  farther  relates  that,  after  Paul 
had  tarried  some  time  at  Athens,  and  had  proceeded  from 
thence  to  Corinth,  whilst  he  was  exercising  his  ministry 
in  that  city,  Silas  and  Timothy  came  to  him  from  Mace- 
donia. Acts,  chap,  xviii.  5.  But  to  reconcile  the  history 
with  the  clause  in  the  epistle,  which  makes  St.  Paul  say, 


184  THE    FIUST    EPISTLE    TO    THE    THESSALONIANS. 

"I  thought  it  good  to  be  left  at  Athens  alone,  and  to  send 
Timothy  unto  you,"  it  is  necessary  to  suppose  that  Timo- 
thy had  come  up  with  St.  Paul  at  Athens ;  a  circum- 
stance which  the  history  does  not  mention.  I  remark, 
therefore,  that,  although  the  history  does  not  expressly 
notice  this  arrival,  yet  it  contains  intimations  which  ren- 
der it  extremely  probable  that  the  fact  took  place.  First, 
as  soon  as  Paul  had  reached  Athens,  he  sent  a  message 
back  to  Silas  and  Timothy  "  for  to  come  to  him  with  all 
speed."  Acts,  chop,  xvii.,  15.  Secondly,  his  stay  at 
Athens  was  on  purpose  that'they  might  join  him  there: 
"Now,  whilst  Paul  waited  for  them  at  Athens,  his  spirit 
was  stirred  in  him.  Acts,  chap.  xvii.  1G.  Thirdly,  his 
departure  from  Athens  does  not  appear  to  have  been  in 
any  sort  hastened  or  abrupt.  It  is  said,  "after  these 
things,"  viz,  his  disputations  with  the  Jews,  his  confer- 
ences with  the  philosophers,  his  discourse  at  Areopagus, 
and  the  gaining  of  some  converts,  "  he  departed  from 
Athens  and  came  to  Corinth."  It  is  not  hinted  that  he 
quitted  Athens  before  the  time  that  he  had  intended  to 
leave  it  ?  it  is  not  suggested  thai  he  was  driven  from 
thence,  as  he  was  from  many  cities,  by  tumults  or  perse- 
cutions, or  because  his  life  was  no  longer  safe.  Observe, 
then,  the  particulars  which  the  history  docs  notice, — that 
Paul  had  ordered  Timothy  to  follow  him  without  delay, 
that  he  waited  at  Athens  on  purpose  that  Timothy  might 
come  up  with  him,  that  he  staid  there  as  long  as  his  own 
choice  led  him  to  continue.  Laying  these  circumstances 
which  the  history  does  disclose  together,  it  is  highly  pro- 
bable that  Timothy  came  to  the  apostle  at  Athens,  a  fact 
which  the  epistle,  we  have  seen,  virtually  asserts,  when 
it  makes  Paul  scud  Timothy  back  from  Athens  to  Thes- 
salonica.  The  sending  back  of  Timothy  into  Macedonia 
accounts  also  lor  his  not  coming  to  Corinth  till  after  Paul 


THE    FIRST    EPISTLE    TO    THE    TIIESS ALONIANS.  185 

nad  been  fixed  in  that  city  some  considerable  time.  Paul 
had  found  out  Aquila  and  Priscilla,  abode  with  them  and 
wrought,  being  of  the  same  craft ;  and  reasoned  in  the 
synagogue  every  Sabbath  day,  and  persuaded  the  Jews 
and  the  Greeks.  Acts,  chap,  xviii.  1 — 5.  All  this  passed 
at  Corinth,  before  Silas  and  Timotheus  were  come  from 
Macedonia.  Acts,  chap,  xviii.  5.  If  this  was  the  first 
time  of  their  coming  up  with  him  after  their  separation  at 
Berea,  there  is  nothing  to  account  for  a  delay  so  contrary 
to  what  appears  from  the  history  itself  to  have  been  St. 
Paul's  plan  and  expectation.  This  is  a  conformity  of  a 
peculiar  species.  The  epistle  discloses  a  fact  which  is 
not  preserved  in  the  history,  but  which  makes  what  is  said 
in  the  history  more  significant,  probable,  and  consistent. 
The  history  bears  marks  of  an  omission  ;  the  epistle  by 
reference  furnishes  a  circumstance  which  supplies  that 
omission. 


No.  V. 

Chap.  ii.  14.  "  For  ye,  brethren,  became  followers 
of  the  churches  of  God  which  in  Judea  are  in  Christ 
Jesus  ;  for  ye  also  have  suffered  like  things  of  your  own 
countrymen  even  as  they  have  of  the  Jews." 

To  a  reader  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  it  might  seem, 
at  first  sight,  that  the  persecutions  which  the  preachers 
and  converts  of  Christianity  underwent  were  suffered  at 
the  hands  of  their  old  adversaries  the  Jews.  But,  if  we 
attend  carefully  to  the  accounts  there  delivered,  we  shall 
observe  that,  though  the  opposition  made  to  the  Gospel 
usually  originated  from  the  enmity  of  the  Jews,  yet  in 
almost  all  places  the  Jews  went  about  to  accomplish 
their    purpose   by    stirring   up   the    Gentile    inhabitants 


186         THE    FIRST    EPISTLE    TO    THE    TIIESSAL0NIANS. 

against  their  converted  countrymen.  Out  of  Judea  they 
had  not  power  to  do  much  mischief  in  any  other  way. 
This  was  the  case  at  Thessalonica  in  particular  :  "  The 
Jews  which  believed  not,  moved  with  envy,  set  all  the 
city  in  an  uproar.  Acts,  chap.  xvii.  ver.  5.  It  was  the 
same  a  short  time  afterwards  at  Berea :  "  When  the  Jews 
of  Thessalonica  had  acknowledged  that  the  word  of  God 
was  preached  of  Paul  at  Berea,  they  came  thither  also, 
and  stirred  up  the  people."  Acts,  chap.  xvii.  13.  And 
before  this  our  apostle  had  met  with  a  like  species  of 
persecution  in  his  progress  through  the  Lesser  Asia :  in 
every  city  "the  unbelieving  Jews  stirred  up  the  Gentiles, 
and  made  their  minds  evil-affected  against  the  brethren  :" 
Acts,  chap.  xiv.  2.  The  epistle  therefore  represents  the 
case  accurately  as  the  history  states  it.  It  was  the  Jews 
always  who  set  on  foot  the  persecutions  against  the 
apostles  and  their  followers.  He  speaks  truly  therefore 
of  them,  when  he  says  in  his  epistle,  "they  both  killed  the 
Lord  Jesus  and  their  own  prophets,  and  have  persecuted 
us, — forbidding  us  to  speak  unto  the  Gentiles  :"  ii.  15, 
16.  But  out  of  Judea  it  was  at  the  hands  of  the  Gen- 
tiles, it  was  "  of  their  own  countrymen,"  that  the  injuries 
they  underwent  were  immediately  sustained  :  "  Ye  have 
suffered  like  things  of  your  own  countrymen,  even  as  they 
have  of  the  Jews." 


No.   VI. 

The  apparent  discrepancies  between  our  epistle  and 
the  history,  though  of  magnitude  sufficient  to  repel  the 
imputation  of  confederacy  or  transcription,  (in  which 
view  they  form  a  part  of  our  argument,)  are  neither  nu- 
merous, nor  very  difficult  to  reconcile. 


THE    FIRST    EPISTLE    TO    THE    THESSALONIANS.  187 

One  of  these  may  be  observed  in  the  ninth  and  tenth 
verses  of  the  second  chapter :  "  For  ye  remember,  breth- 
ren, our  labor  and  travel ;  for,  laboring  night  and  day, 
because  we  would  not  be  chargeable  unto  any  of  you,  we 
preached  unto  you  the  Gospel  of  God.  Ye  are  witnesses, 
and  God  also,  how  holily,  and  justly,  and  unblamably 
we  behaved  ourselves  among  you  that  believe."  A  per- 
son who  reads  this  passage  is  naturally  led  by  it  to  suppose 
that  the  writer  had  dwelt  at  Thessalonica  for  some  consid- 
erable time ;  yet  of  St.  Paul's  ministry  in  that  city,  the  his- 
tory gives  no  other  account  than  the  following  :  that  "  he 
came  to  Thessalonica,  where  was  a  synagogue  of  the  Jews ; 
that,  as  his  manner  was,  he  went  in  unto  them,  and  three 
sabbath  days  reasoned  with  them  out  of  the  Scriptures ; 
that  some  of  them  believed  and  consorted  with  Paul  and 
Silas.^  The  history  then  proceeds  to  tell  us  that  the 
Jews  which  believed  not  set  the  city  in  an  uproar,  and 
assaulted  the  house  of  Jason,  where  Paul  and  his  com- 
panions lodged  ;  that  the  consequence  of  this  outrage 
was,  that  "  the  brethren  immediately  sent  away  Paul  and 
Silas  by  night  unto  Berea:"  Acts,  chap.  xvii.  1 — 10. 
From  the  mention  of  his  preaching  three  Sabbath  days  in 
the  Jewish  synagogue,  and  from  the  want  of  any  farther 
specification  of  his  ministry,  it  has  usually  been  taken  for 
granted  that  Paul  did  not  continue  at  Thessalonica  more 
than  three  weeks.  This,  however,  is  inferred  without 
necessity.  It  appears  to  have  been  St.  Paul's  practice, 
in  almost  every  place  that  he  came  to,  upon  his  first  arri- 
val to  repair  to  the  synagogue.  lie  thought  himself 
bound  to  propose  the  Gospel  to  the  Jews  first,  agreeably 
to  what  he  declared  at  Antioch  in  Pisidia  ;  "  it  was  neces- 
sary that  the  word  of  God  should  first  have  been  spoken 
to  you  ;"  Acts,  chap.  xiii.  46.  If  the  Jews  rejected  his 
ministry,  he  quitted  the  synagogue,  and  betook  himself  to 


188         THE    FIRST    EPISTLE    TO    THE    TIIESSALONIANS. 

a  Gentile  audience.  At  Corinth,  upon  his  first  coming 
thither  he  reasoned  in  the  synagogue  every  sabbath; 
"but  when  the  Jews  opposed  themselves,  and  blasphe- 
med, he  departed  thence,  expressly  telling  them,  '•  From 
henceforth  I  will  go  unto  the  Gentiles  ;  and  he  remained 
in  that  city  a  year  and  six  months  :"  Acts,  chap,  xviii.  6 — 
11.  At  Ephesus,  in  like  manner,  for  the  space  of  three 
months  he  went  into  the  synagogue  ;  but  "  when  divers 
were  hardened  and  believed  not,  but  spake  evil  of  that 
way,  he  departed  from  them  and  separated  the  disciples, 
disputing  daily  in  the  school  of  one  Tyrannus ;  and  this 
continued  by  the  space  of  two  years :"  Acts,  chap.  xix. 
9,  10.  Upon  inspecting  the  history,  I  see  nothing  in  it 
which  negatives  the  supposition  that  St.  Paul  pursued  the 
same  plan  at  Thessalonica  which  he  adopted  in  other 
places  ;  and  that,  though  he  resorted  to  the  synagogue 
only  three  sabbath  days,  yet  he  remained  in  the  city,  and 
in  the  exercise  of  his  ministry  amongst  the  Gentile  citi- 
zens, much  longer  ;  and  until  the  success  of  his  preach- 
ing had  provoked  the  Jews  to  excite  the  tumult  and  insur- 
rection by  which  he  was  driven  away. 

Another  seeming  discrepancy  is  found  in  the  ninth 
verse  of  the  first  chapter  of  the  epistle  :  "  For  they  thorn- 
selves  show  of  us  what  manner  of  entering  in  we  had 
unto  you,  and  how  tje  turned  to  God  from  idols  to  serve 
the  living  and  true  God."  This  text  contains  an  asser- 
tion that,  by  means  of  St  Paul's  ministry  at  Thessalonica, 
many  idolatrous  Gentiles  had  been  brought  over  to  Chris- 
tianity. Yet  the  history,  in  describing  the  effects  of  that 
ministry,  only  says  that  "  some  of  the  Jews  believed,  and 
of  the  devout  Greeks  a  great  multitude,  and  of  the  chief 
women  not  a  few:"  chap.  xvii.  4.  The  devout  Greeks 
were  those  who  already  worshipped  the  one  true  God ; 


THE    FIRST    EPISTLE    TO    THE    THESSALONIANS.         189 

and  therefore  could  not  be  said,  by  embracing  Christi- 
anity, "  to  be  turned  to  God  from  idols. 

This  is  the  difficulty.  The  answer  may  be  assisted  by 
the  following  observations  :  The  Alexandrian  and  Cam- 
bridge manuscripts  read  (for  w**  asSo/tevup  'Ellr^wv  nolv 
nh/Qog)  ibtv  ufGouEioiv  xai  '  EXhivuv  nokv  nlrfiog'  in  which 
reading  they  are  also  confirmed  by  the  Vulgate  Latin. 
And  this  reading  is,  in  my  opinion,  strongly  supported  by 
the  considerations,  first,  that  01  oeGof/svoi  alone,  i.  e.,  with- 
out 'Ettijveg,  is  used  in  this  sense  in  the  same  chapter — 

Paul,  being  come  to  Athens,  dteleyeio  ev  ttj  ovvayoiyt]  joig 
ladixioig  y.uv  loig  ueGouevoig ;  secondly,  that  oeGofisroi  and 
EIItjvbs  nowhere  come  together.  The  expression  is  redun- 
dant. The  ot  oeGoueroi  must  be  'Ekktjveg.  Thirdly,  that 
the  x«*  is  much  more  likely  to  have  been  left  out  incuria 
manus  than  to  have  been  put  in.  Or,  after  all,  if  we  be 
not  allowed  to  change  the  present  reading,  which  is 
undoubtedly  retained  by  a  great  plurality  of  copies,  may 
not  the  passage  in  the  history  be  considered  as  describing 
only  the  effects  of  St.  Paul's  discourses  during  the  three 
sabbath  days  in  which  he  preached  in  the  synagogue  ? 
and  may  it  not  be  true,  as  we  have  remarked  above,  that 
his  application  to  the  Gentiles  at  large,  and  his  success 
amongst  them,  was  posterior  to  this  ? 


CHAPTER  X. 

THE  SECOND  EPISTLE  TO  THE  THESSALONIANS. 
No.     I. 

It  may  seem  odd  to  allege  obscurity  itself  as  an  argu- 
ment, or  to  draw  a  proof  in  favor  of  a  writing  from  that 
which  is  natural])7  considered  as  the  principal  defect  in 
its  composition.  The  present  epistle,  however,  furnishes 
a  passage,  hitherto  unexplained,  and  probably  inexplicable 
by  us,  the  existence  of  which,  under  the  darkness  and 
difficulties  that  attend  it,  can  be  accounted  for  only  upon 
the  supposition  of  the  epistle  being  genuine ;  and  upon 
that  supposition  is  accounted  for  with  great  ease.  The 
passage  which  I  allude  to  is  found  in  the  second  chapter: 
"  That  day  shall  not  come,  except  there  come  a  falling 
away  first,  and  that  man  of  sin  be  revealed,  the  son  of 
perdition,  who  opposeth  and  exalteth  himself  above  all 
that  is  called  God,  or  that  is  worshipped ;  so  that  he  as 
God  sitteth  in  the  temple  of  God,  showing  himself  that  he 
is  God.  Remember  ye  not  that  when  I  was  yet  with 
you  I  told  you  these  things  ?  And  now  ye  know  what 
withholdeth,  that  he  m:?hl  be  revealed  in  his  time  :  for  the 
mystery  of  iniquity  doth  already  work,  only  he  that  now 
letteth  will  let,  until  he  he  taken  out  of  the  way  ;  and  then 
shall  that  wicked  be  revealed,  whom  the  Lord  shall  con- 
sume with  the  spirit  of  his  mouth,  and  shall  destroy  with 
the  brightness  of  his  coming."  It  were  superfluous  to 
prove,  because  it  is  in  vain  to  deny,  that  this  passage  is 


THE    SECOND    EPISTLE    TO    THE    THESSALONIANS.       191 

involved  in  great  obscurity,  more  especially. the  clauses 
distinguished  by  Italics.  Now  the  observation  I  have  to 
offer  is  founded  upon  this,  that  the  passage  expressly 
refers  to  a  conversation  which  the  author  had  previously 
holder.. with  the  Thessalonians  upon  the  same  subject: 
"  Remember  ye  not  that  when  I  was  yet  with  you  /  told 
you  these  tilings  ?  And  now  ye  know  what  withholdeth." 
If  such  conversation  actually  passed  ;  if,  whilst  "  he  was 
yet  with  them,  he  told  them  those  things,"  then  it  follows 
that  the  epistle  is  authentic.  And  of  the  reality  of  this 
conversation  it  appears  to  be  a  proof,  that  what  is  said  in 
the  epistle  might  be  understood  by  those  who  had  been 
present  to  such  conversation,  and  yet  be  incapable  of 
being  explained  by  any  other.  No  man  writes  unintelli- 
gibly on  purpose.  But  it  may  easily  happen  that  a  part 
of  a  letter  which  relates  to  a  subject  upon  which  the  par- 
ties had  conversed  together  before,  which  refers  to  what 
had  been  before  said,  which  is  in  truth  a  portion  or  con- 
tinuation of  a  former  discourse,  may  be  utterly  without 
meaning  to  a  stranger  who  should  pick  up  the  letter  upon 
tlie  road,  and  yet  be  perfectly  clear  to  the  person  to 
whom  it  is  directed,  and  with  whom  the  previous  com- 
munication had  passed.  And  if,  in  a  letter  which  thus 
accidentally  fell  into  my  hands,  I  found  a  passage  ex- 
pressly referring  to  a  former  conversation,  and  difficult 
to  be  explained  without  knowing  that  conversation,  I 
should  consider  this  very  difficulty  as  a  proof  that  the 
conversation  had  actually  passed,  and  consequently  that 
the  letter  contained  the  real  correspondence  of  real  per- 
sons. 


192       THE    SECOND    ErlSTLE    TO    THE    THESSALONIANS. 


No.    II. 

Chap.  iii.  8.  "  Neitlier  did  we  eat  any  man's  bread 
for  nought,  but  wrought  with  labor  night  and  day,  that 
we  might  not  be  chargeable  to  any  of  you :  not  because 
we  have  no  power,  but  to  make  ourselves  an  ensample 
unto  you  to  follow." 

In  a  letter  purporting  to  have  been  written  to  another 
of  the  Macedonia  churches,  we  find  the  following  decla- 
ration 

"  Now,  ye  Philippians,  know,  also,  that  in  the  begin- 
ning of  the  Gospel,  when  I  departed  from  Macedonia,  no 
church  communicated  with  me  as  concerning  giving  and 
receiving  but  ye  only? 

The  conformity  between  these  two  passages  is  strong 
and  plain.  They  confine  the  transaction  to  the  same 
period.  The  Epistle  to  the  Philippians  refers  to  what 
passed  "  in  the  beginning  of  the  Gospel,"  that  is  to  say, 
during  the  first  preaching  of  the  Gospel  on  that  side  of  the 
iEgean  Sea.  The  Epistle  to  the  Thessalonians  speaks 
of  the  apostle's  conduct  in  that  city  upon  "  his  first  en- 
trance in  unto  them,"  which  the  history  informs  us  was 
in  the  course  of  his  first  visit  to  the  peninsula  of  Greece. 

As  St.  Paul  tells  the  Philippians  "that  no  church  com- 
municated with  him,  as  concerning  giving  and  receiving, 
but  they  only,"  he  could  not,  consistently  with  the  truth 
of  this  declaration,  have  received  any  thing  from  the 
neighboring  church  of  Thessalonica.  What  thus  appears 
by  general  implication  in  an  epistle  to  another  church, 
when  he  writes  to  the  Thessalonians  themselves,  is 
noticed  expressly  and  particularly:  "Neither  did  we  eat 
any  man's  bread  for  nought,  but  wrought  night  and  day, 
that  we  might  not  be  chargeable  to  any  of  you." 


THE    SECOND    EPISTLE    TO    THE    THESSALONIANS.       193 

The  texts  here  cited  farther,  also,  exhibit  a  mark  of 
conformity  with  what  St.  Paul  is  made  to  say  of  himself 
in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles.  The  apostle  not  only  reminds 
the  Thessalonians  that  he  had  not  been  chargeable  to  any 
of  them,  but  he  states  likewise  the  motive  which  dictated 
this  reserve ;  "  not  because  we  have  not  power,  but  to 
make  ourselves  an  ensample  unto  you  to  follow  us." 
Chap.  iii.  9.  This  conduct,  and  what  is  much  more  pre- 
cise, the  end  which  he  had  in  view  by  it,  was  the  very 
same  as  that  which  the  history  attributes  to  St.  Paul  in  a 
discourse  which  it  represents  him  to  have  addressed  to 
the  elders  of  the  church  of  Ephesus  :  "  Yea,  ye  your- 
selves also  know  that  these  hands  have  ministered  unto 
my  necessities,  and  to  them  that  were  with  me.  I  have 
showed  you  all  things,  how  that  so  laboring  ye  ought  to 
support  the  weak."  Acts,  chap.  xx.  34.  The  sentiment 
in  the  epistle  and  in  the  speech  is  in  both  parts  of  it  so 
much  alike,  and  yet  the  words  which  convey  it  show  so 
little  of  imitation  or  even  of  resemblance,  that  the  agree- 
ment cannot  well  be  explained  without  supposing  the 
speech  and  the  letter  to  have  really  proceeded  from  the 
same  person. 


No.  III. 

Our  reader  remembers  the  passage  in  the  First  Epistle 
to  the  Thessalonians,  in  which  St.  Paul  spoke  of  the  com- 
ing of  Christ ;  "  This  we  say  unto  you  by  the  word  of  the 
Lord,  that  we  which  are  alive,  and  remain  unto  the  com- 
ing of  the  Lord,  shall  not  prevent  them  which  are  asleep: 
for  the  Lord  himself  shall  descend  from  heaven,  and  the 
dead  in  Christ  shall  rise  first ;  then  we  which  are  alive 
and  remain  shall  be  caught  up  together  with  them  in  the 

9 


194       THE    SECOND    EPISTLE    TO    THE    THESSALONIANS. 

clouds,  and  so  shall  we  be  ever  with  the  Lord. — But  ye, 
brethren,  are  not  in  darkness,  that  that  day  should  over- 
take you  as  a  thief."  1  Thess.  iv.  15 — 17,  and  chap.  v.  4. 
It  should  seem  that  the  Thessalonians,  or  some,  how- 
ever, amongst  them,  had  from  this  passage  conceived  an 
opinion  (and  that  not  very  unnaturally)  that  the  coming 
of  Christ  was  to  take  place  instantly,  <m  eveoirjxsv  ;  *  and 
that  this  persuasion  had  produced,  as  it  well  might,  much 
agitation  in  the  church.  The  agostle  therefore  now 
writes,  amongst  other  purposes,  to  quiet  this  alarm,  and 
to  rectify  the  misconstruction  that  had  been  put  upon  his 
words : — "  Now  we  beseech  you,  brethren,  by  the  com- 
ing of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  by  our  gathering 
together  unto  him,  that  ye  be  not  soon  shaken  in  mind, 
or  be  troubled,  neither  by  spirit,  nor  by  word,  nor  by 
letter  as  from  us,  as  that  the  day  of  Christ  is  at  hand." 
If  the  allusion  which  we  contend  for  be  admitted,  namely, 
if  it  be  admitted  that  the  passage  in  the  second  epistle 
relates  to  the  passage  in  the  lirst,  it  amounts  to  a  consid- 
erable proof  of  the  genuineness  of  both  epistles.  I  have 
no  conception,  because  I  know  no  example,  of  such  a 
device  in  a  forgery,  as  first  to  frame  an  ambiguous  pas- 
sage in  a  letter,  then  to  represent  the  persons  to  whom 
the  letter  is  addressed  as  mistaking  the  meaning  of  the 
passage,  and  lastly,  to  write  a  second  letter  in  order  to 
correct  this  mistake. 

I  have  said  that  this  argument  arises  out  of  the  text,  if 
the  allusion  be  admitted  :  fori  am  not  ignorant  that  many 
expositors  understand  the  passage  in  the  second  epistle, 
as  referring  to  some  forged  letters,  which  had  been  pro- 
duced in  St.  Paul's  name,  and  in  which  the  apostle  had 
been  made  to  say  that  the  coming  of  Christ  was  then  at 

*  «On  (vcvrriKcr,  ncmpe  hoc  anno,  says  Grotius,  cvtornKcv  hie  dicitur  <le  re 
prtesenti,  ut  Rom.  viii.  38 ;  1  Cor.  iii.  22;  Gal.  i.  4;  Heb.  ix.  9. 


THE    SECOND    EPISTLE    TO    THE    THES3ALONIANS.       195 

hand.      In  defence,  however,  of  the  explanation  which 
we  propose,  the  reader  is  desired  to  observe, — 

1.  The  strong  fact,  that  there  exists  a  passage  in  the 
first  epistle,  to  which  that  in  the  second  is  capable  of 
being  referred,  i.  e.,  which  accounts  for  the  error  the 
writer  is  solicitous  to  remove.  Had  no  other  epistle 
than  the  second  been  extant,  and  had  it  under  these  cir- 
cumstances come  to  be  considered,  whether  the  text 
before  us  related  to  a  forged  epistle  or  to  some  miscon- 
struction of  a  true  one,  many  conjectures  and  many  pro- 
babilities might  have  been  admitted  in  the  inquiry,  which 
can  have  little  weight  when  an  epistle  is  produced  con- 
taining the  very  sort  of  passage  we  were  seeking,  that  is,  a 
passage  liable  to  the  misinterpretation  which  the  apostle 
protests  against. 

2.  That  the  clause  which  introduces  the  passage  in  the 
second  epistle  bears  a  particular  affinity  to  what  is  found 
in  the  passage  cited  from  the  first  epistle.  The  clause  is 
this  :  "  We  beseech  you,  brethren,  by  the  coming  of  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  by  our  gathering  together  unto 
him."  Now  in  the  first  epistle  the  description  of  the 
coming  of  Christ  is  accompanied  with  the  mention  of  this 
very  circumstance  of  his  saints  being  collected  round 
him.  "  The  Lord  himself  shall  descend  from  heaven 
with  a  shout,  with  the  voice  of  the  archangel  and  with 
the  trump  of  God,  and  the  dead  in  Christ  shall  rise  first ; 
then  we  which  are  alive  and  remain  shall  be  caught  up 
together  with  them  in  the  clouds,  to  meet  the  Lord  in  the 
air."  1  Thess.  chap.  iv.  16,  17.  This  I  suppose  to  be 
the  "gathering  together  unto  him"  intended  in  the  second 
epistle ;  and  that  the  author,  when  he  used  these  words, 
retained  in  his  thoughts  what  he  had  written  on  the  sub- 
ject before. 

3.  The  second  epistle  is  written  in  the  joint  name  of 


196       THE    SECOND    EPISTLE    TO    THE    THESSALONIANS. 

Paul,  Silvan  us,  and  Timotheus,  and  it  cautions  the  Thes- 
salonians  against  being  misled  "by  letter  as  from  us"  (&g 
Si  i\u(»v).  Do  not  these  words  Si  ^uur,  appropriate  the  ref- 
erence to  some  writing  which  bore  the  name  of  these 
three  teachers  ?  Now  this  circumstance,  which  is  a  very 
close  one,  belongs  to  the  epistle  at  present  in  our  hands  ; 
for  the  epistle  which  we  call  the  First  Epistle  to  the 
Thessalonians  contains  these  names  in  its  superscription. 
4.  The  words  in  the  original,  as  far  as  they  are  mate- 
rial to  be  Stated,  are  these:  £'f  to  /it]  ra^ewg  aaXevdtjvai 
ifiag  a.TO  ru  voog,  /jtjis  ^gosiadai,  ftrjis  Sia  nvBMjxarog,  [u]re  dice 
Xoys,  fnjis  dl    smoTohjg,  &g   dl  ^juwy,  &g   on  EVEOxrjxev  tj  ijuega  i« 

Xoimu.     Under  the  weight  of  the  preceding  observations, 

may  not  these  words  /"/re  diu  loya,  f/rjis  dl  entaroXrjg,  &g  di 
fy/wr,  be  construed  to  signify  quasi  nos  quid  tale  aut 
dixerinms  aut  scripserimus*  intimating  that  their  words 
had  been  mistaken,  and  that  they  had  in  truth  said  or 
written  no  such  thing  ? 

*  Should  a  contrary  interpretation  be  preferred,  I  do  not  think  that  it  im- 
plies the  conclusion  that  a  false  epistle  had  then  been  published  in  the  apos- 
tle's name.  It  will  completely  satisfy  the  allusion  in  the  text  to  allow  that 
some  one  or  <5thrr  at  Thessalonica  had  pretended  to  have  been  told  by  St. 
Paid  and  his  companions,  or  to  have  seen  a  letter  from  them,  in  which  they 
had  said,  that  the  day  of  Christ  was  at  hand.  In  like  manner  as,  Acts  xv. 
1,  24,  it  is  recorded  that  some  had  pretended  to  have  received  instructions 
from  the  church  at  Jerusalem,  which  had  been  received,  "  to  whom  they 
gave  no  such  commandment."  And  thus  Dr.  Benson  interpreted  the  pas- 
sage /n)rc  9pticta6at,  jtr\Tt  Cm  TrrtVjutTOS,  fi'irc  Sta  /\oy«,^rjrc  St  CTTtaro^nS,  w{  Si  fyuan', 

"  nor  be  dismayed  by  any  revelation,  or  discourse,  or  epistle,  which  any  one 
shall  pretend  to  have  heard  or  received  from  us." 


CHAPTER  XL 

THE  FIRST  EPISTLE  TO  TIMOTHY. 

From  the  third  verse  of  the  first,  chapter, "  ns  I  besought 
thee  to  abide  still  at  Ephesus  when  I  went  into  Macedo- 
nia," it  is  evident  that  this  epistle  was  written  soon  after 
St.  Paul  had  gone  to  Macedonia  from  Ephesus.  Dr. 
Benson  fixes  its  date  to  the  time  of  St.  Paul's  journey 
recorded  in  the  beginning  of  the  twentieth  chapter  of  the 
Acts ;  "  And  after  the  uproar  (excited  by  Demetrius  at 
Ephesus)  was  ceased,  Paul  called  unto  him  the  disciples, 
and  embraced  them,  and  departed  for  to  go  into  Mace- 
donia." And  in  this  opinion  Dr.  Benson  is  followed  by 
Michael  is,  as  he  was  preceded  by  the  greater  part  of  the 
commentators  who  have  considered  the  question.  There 
is,  however,  one  objection  to  the  hypothesis,  which  these 
learned  men  appear  to  me  to  have  overlooked :  and  it  is 
no  other  than  this,  that  the  superscription  of  the  Second 
Epistle  to  the  Corinthians  seems  to  prove  that,  at  the 
time  St.  Paul  is  supposed  by  them  to  have  written  this 
epistle  to  Timothy,  Timothy  ,in  truth  was  with  St.  Paul 
in  Macedonia.  Paul,  as  it  is  related  in  the  Acts,  left 
Ephesus  "  for  to  go  into  Macedonia."  When  he  had  got 
into  Macedonia,  he  wrote  his  Second  Epistle  to  the  Co- 
rinthians. Concerning  this  point  there  exists  little  vari- 
ety of  opinion.  It  is  plainly  indicated  by  the  contents  of 
the  epistle.  It  is  also  strongly  implied  that  the  epistle 
was  written  soon  after  the  apostle's  arrival  in  Macedo- 
nia ;  for  he  begins  his  letter  by  a  train  of  reflection,  refer- 


198  THE    FIRST    EPISTLE    TO    TIMOTHY. 

ring  to  his  persecutions  in  Asia  as  to  recent  transactions, 
as  to  dangers  from  which  he  had  lately  been  delivered. 
But  in  the  salutation  with  which  the  epistle  opens,  Timothy 
was  joined  with  St.  Paul,  and,  consequently,  could  not  at 
that  time  be  "  left  behind  at  Ephesus."  And,  as  to  the 
only  solution  of  the  difficulty  which  can  be  thought  of, 
viz.  that  Timothy,  though  he  was  left  behind  at  Ephe- 
sus upon  St.  Paul's  departure  from  Asia,  yet  might  follow 
him  so  soon  after  as  to  come  up  with  the  apostle  in  Mace- 
donia, before  he  wrote  his  epistle  to  the  Corinthians  ;  that 
supposition  is  inconsistent  with  the  terms  and  tenor  of 
the  epistle  throughout.  For  the  writer  speaks  uniformly 
of  his  intention  to  return  to  Timothy  at  Ephesus,  and  not 
of  his  expecting  Timothy  to  come  to  him  in  Macedonia : 
"  These  things  write  I  unto  thee,  hoping  to  come  unto  thee 
shortly  ;  but,  if  I  tarry  long,  that  thou  mayest  know  how 
thou  oughtest  to  behave  thyself:"  chap.  iii.  14,  15.  "  Till 
I  come,  give  attendance  to  reading,  to  exhortation,  to 
doctrine:"  chap.  iv.  13. 

Since,  therefore,  the  leaving  of  Timothy  behind  at 
Ephesus,  when  Paul  went  into  Macedonia,  suits  not  with 
any  journey  into  Macedonia  recorded  in  the  Acts,  I  con- 
cur with  Bishop  Pearson  in  placing  the  date  of  this  epistle, 
and  the  journey  referred  to  in  it,  at  a  period  subsequent 
to  St.  Paul's  first  imprisonment  at  Rome,  and  consequently 
subsequent  to  the  era  up  to  which  the  Acts  of  the  Apos- 
tles brings  his  history.  The  only  difficulty  which  attends 
our  opinion  is,  that  St.  Paul  must,  according  to  us,  have 
come  to  Ephesus  after  his  liberation  at  Rome,  contrary 
as  it  should  seem  to  what  he  foretold  to  the  Ephesian 
elders,  "  that  they  should  see  his  face  no  more."  And  it 
is  to  save  the  infallibility  of  this  prediction,  and  for  no 
other  reason  of  weight,  that  an  earlier  date  is  assigned 
to  tliis    epistle.     The   prediction   itself,   however,   when 


THE    FIRST    EPISTLE    TO    TIMOTHY.  ]  99 

considered  in  connection  with  the  circumstances  under 
which  it  was  delivered,  does  not  seem  to  demand  so  much 
anxiety.    The  words  in  question  are  found  in  the  twenty- 
fifth  verse  of  the  twentieth  chapter  of  the  Acts :    "  And 
now,  hehold,  I  know  that  ye  all,  among  whom  I  have 
gone  preaching  the  kingdom  of  God,  shall  see  my  face 
no  more/'     In  the  twenty-second  and  twenty-third  verses 
of  the  same  chapter,  i.  e.  two  verses  before,  the  apostle 
makes  this  declaration  :  "  And  now,  behold,  I  go  bound 
in  the  spirit  unto  Jerusalem,  not  knowing  the  things  that 
shall  befall  me  there  ;  save  that  the  Holy  Ghost  witnesseth 
in  every  city,  saying  that  bonds  and   afflictions    abide 
me."     This  "  witnessing   of  the  Holy  Ghost"  was  un- 
doubtedly prophetic  and  supernatural.      But  it  went  no 
farther  than  to  foretell  that  bonds  and  afflictions  awaited 
Tiim.     And  I  can  very  well  conceive  that  this  might  be 
all  which  was  communicated  to  the  apostle  by  extraordi- 
nary revelation,  and  that  the  rest  was  the  conclusion  of 
his  own  mind,  the  desponding  inference  which  he  drew 
from  strong   and   repeated   intimations   of  approaching 
danger.     And  the  expression,  "  I  know,"  which  St.  Paul 
here  uses,  does  not,  perhaps,  when   applied   to   future 
events,  affecting  himself,  convey  an  assertion  so  positive 
and  absolute  as  we  may  at  first  sight  apprehend.     Jn  the 
first  chapter  of  the  Epistle  to  the   Philippfans,  and  the 
twenty-fifth  verse,  "  I  know,"  says  he,  "that  I  shall  abide 
and  continue  with  you  all,  for  your  furtherance  and  joy 
of  faith."     Notwithstanding  this  strong  declaration,  in  the 
second  chapter  and  twenty-third  verse  of  this  same  epis- 
tle, and  speaking  also  of  the  very  same  event,  he  is  con- 
tent to  use  a  language  of  some  doubt  and  uncertainty : 
"  Him,  therefore,  I  hope  to  send  presently,  so  soon  as  I 
shall  see  how  it  will  go  with  me.     But  I  trust  in  the  Lord 
that  I  also  myself  shall  come  shortly:"  and,  a  few  verses 


200  THE    FIRST    EPISTLE    TO    TIMOTHY. 

preceding  these,  he  not  only  seems  to  doubt  of  his  safety, 
but  almost  to  despair  ;  to  contemplate  the  possibility  at 
least  of  his  condemnation  and  martyrdom  :  "  Yea,  and  if 
I  be  offered  upon  the  sacrifice  and  service  of  your  faith,  I 
joy  and  rejoice  with  you  all." 


No.    I. 

But  can  we  show  that  St.  Paul  visited  Ephesus  after 
his  liberation  at  Rome  ?  Or,  rather,  can  we  collect  any 
hints  from  his  other  letters  which  make  it  probable  that 
he  did  ?  If  we  can,  then  we  have  a  coincidence.  If  we 
cannot,  we  have  only  an  unauthorized  supposition,  to 
which  the  exigency  of  the  case  compels  us  to  resort. 
Now,  for  this  purpose,  let  us  examine  the  Epistle  to  the 
Philippians  and  the  Epistle  to  Philemon.  These  two 
epistles  purport  to  be  written  whilst  St.  Paul  was  yet  a 
prisoner  at  Rome.  To  the  Philippians  he  writes  as  fol- 
lows :  "  I  trust  in  the  Lord  that  I  also  myself  shall  come 
shortly."  To  Philemon,  who  was  a  Colossian,  he  gives 
this  direction :  "  But,  withal,  prepare  me  also  a  lodging, 
for  I  trust  that,  through  your  prayers,  I  shall  be  given 
unto  you."  An  inspection  of  the  map  will  show  us  that 
Colosse  was  a  city  of  the  Lesser  Asia,  lying  eastward,  and 
at  no  gre;it  distance  from  Ephesus.  Philippi  was  on 
the  other,  i.  e.  the  Western,  side  of  the  iEgean  Sea.  If 
the  apostle  executed  his  purpose  ;  if,  in  pursuance  of  the 
intention  expressed  in  his  letter  to  Philemon,  he  came  to 
Colosse  soon  after  he  was  set  at  liberty  at  Rome,  it  is 
very  improbable  that  he  would  omit  to  visit  Ephesus, 
which  lay  so  near  to  it,  and  where  he  had  spent  three 
years  of  his  ministry.  As  he  was  also  under  a  promise 
to  the  church  of  Philippi  to  see  them  "  shortly ;"  if  he 


THE    FIRST    EPISTLE    TO    TIMOTHY.  201 

passed  from  Colosse  to  Philippi,  or  from  Philippi  to  Colosse,- 
he  could  hardly  avoid  taking  Ephesus  in  his  way. 


No.   II. 

Chap.  v.  9.  "  Let  not  a  widow  be  taken  into  the  num- 
ber under  threescore  years  old." 

This  accords  with  the  account  delivered  in  the  sixth 
chapter  of  the  Acts.  "  And  in  those  days,  when  the 
number  of  the  disciples  was  multiplied,  there  arose  a 
murmuring  of  the  Grecians  against  the  Hebrews,  because 
their  ividows  were  neglected  in  the  daily  ministration" 
It  appears  that,  from  the  first  formation  of  the  Christian 
church, provision  was  made  out  of  the  public  funds  of  the 
society  for  the  indigent  widows  who  belonged  to  it.  The 
history,  we  have  seen,  distinctly  records  the  existence  of 
such  an  institution  at  Jerusalem,  a  few  years  after  our 
Lord's  ascension ;  and  is  led  to  the  mention  of  it  very 
incidentally,  viz.  by  a  dispute,  of  which  it  was  the  occa- 
sion, and  which  produced  important  consequences  to  the 
Christian  community.  The  epistle,  without  being  sus- 
pected of  borrowing  from  the  history,  refers,  briefly 
indeed,  but  decisively,  to  a  similar  establishment,  sub- 
sisting some  years  afterwards  at  Ephesus.  This  agree- 
ment indicates  that  both  writings  were  founded  upon 
real  circumstances. 

But,  in  this  article,  the  material  thing  to  be  noticed  is 
the  mode  of  expression :  "  Let  not  a  widow  be  taken  into 
the  number." — No  previous  account  or  explanation  is 
given,  to  which  these  words,  "  into  the  number,"  can 
refer ;  but  the  direction  comes  concisely  and  unpre- 
paredly ;  "  Let  not  a  widow  be  taken  into  the  number." 
Now  this  is  the  way  in  which  a  man  writes  who  is  con- 


202  THE    FIRST    EPISTLE    TO    TIMOTHY. 

scions  that  he  is  writing  to  persons  already  acquainted 
with  the  subject  of  his  letter  ;  and  who,  he  knows,  will 
readily  apprehend  and  apply  what  he  says  by  virtue  of 
their  being  so  acquainted ;  but  it  is  not  the  way  in  which 
a  man  writes  upon  any  other  occasion  ;  and,  least  of  all, 
in  which  a  man  would  draw  up  a  feigned  letter,  or  intro- 
duce a  supposititious  fact.'"'* 


No.  III. 

Chap.  iii.  2,  3.  ';  A  bishop  then  must  be  blameless,  the 
husband  of  one  wife,  vigilant,  sober,  of  good  behavior. 
given  to  hospitality,  apt  to  teach  ;    not  given  to  wine,  no 

*  It  is  not  altogether  unconnected  with  our  general  purpose  to  remark,  in 
the  passage  before  us.  the  selection  and  reserve  which  St.  Paul  recommends 
to  the  governors  of  the  church  of  Ephesus  in  the  bestowing  relief  upon  the 
poor,  because  it  refutes  a  calumny  which  has  been  insinuated,  that  the  lib- 
erality of  the  first  Christians  was  an  artifice  to  catch  converts ;  or  one  of 
the  temptations,  however,  by  which  the  idle  and  mendicant  were  drawn 
into  this  society  :  "  Let  not  a  widow  be  taken  into  the  number  under  three- 
score years  old,  having  been  the  wife  of  one  man,  well  reported  of  for  good 
works;  if  she  have  brought  up  children,  if  she  have  lodged  strangers,  if  she 
have  washed  the  saints'  feet,  if  she  have  relieved  the  afflicted,  if  she  have 
diligently  followed  every  good  work.  But  the  younger  widows  refuse,"  (v. 
9.  10,  11.)  And,  in  another  place,  "If  any  man  or  woman  that  believeth 
have  widows,  let  them  relieve  them,  and  let  nut  the  church  be  charged ;  that 
it  may  relieve  them  that  are  widows  indeed."  And  to  the  same  effect,  or 
rather  more  to  our  present  purpose,  the.  Apostle  writes  in  the  Second  Epis- 
tle to  the  Thessalonians :  ii-Even  when  we  were  with  you,  this  we  com- 
manded you,  that,  if  any  would  not  work,  neither  should  he  eat,"  /'.  c.  at 
the  public  expense.  "  For  we  hear  that  there  are  some  which  walk  among 
you  disorderly,  working  not  >>'  all,  but  are  busy-bodies.  Now  them  that  are 
such  we  command  and  exhort  by  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  that  with  quiet- 
ness they  work,  and  eat  their  own  bread."  Could  a  designing  or  dissolute 
poor  take  advantage  of  bounty  regulated  with  so  much  caution;  or  could 
the  mind  which  dictated  those  sober  ami  prudent  directions  be  influenced  in 
his  recommendations  of  public  charity  by  any  other  than  the  properest  mo- 
tives of  beneficence  1 


THE    FIRST    EPISTLE    TO    TIMC  THY.  203 

striker,  nor  greedy  of  filthy  lucre  ;  but  patient,  not  a 
brawler,  not  covetous :  one  that  ruleth  well  his  own 
house." 

" No  striker  /*  That  is  the  article  which  I  single  out 
from  the  collection,  as  evincing  the  antiquity  at  least,  if 
not  the  genuineness,  of  the  epistle ;  because  it  is  an  arti- 
cle which  no  man  would  have  made  the  subject  of  cau- 
tion who  lived  in  an  advanced  era  of  the  church.  It 
agreed  with  the  infancy  of  the  society,  and  with  no  other 
state  of  it.  After  the  government  of  the  church  had 
acquired  the  dignified  form  which  it  soon  and  naturally 
assumed,  this  injunction  could  have  no  place.  Would  a 
person  who  lived  under  a  hierarchy,  such  as  the  Chris- 
tian hierarchy  became  when  it  had  settled  into  a  regular 
establishment,  have  thought  it  necessary  to  prescribe, 
concerning  the  qualification  of  a  bishop,  "  that  he  should 
be  no  striker  ?"  And  this  injunction  would  be  equally 
alien  from  the  imagination  of  the  writer,  whether  he 
wrote  in  his  own  character,  or  personated  that  of  an 
apostle. 


No.  IV. 

Chap.  v.  23.  "  Drink  no  longer  water,  but  use  a  lit- 
tle wine  for  thy  stomach's  sake  and  thine  often  infirmi- 
ties." 

Imagine  an  impostor  sitting  down  to  forge  an  epistle 
in  the  name  of  St.  Paul.  Is  it  credible  that  it  should 
come  into  bis  head  to  give  such  a  direction  as  this ;  so 
remote  from  every  thing  of  doctrine  or  discipline,  every 
thing  of  public  concern  to  the  religion  or  the  church,  or 
to  any  sect,  order,  or  party  in  it,  and  from  every  purpose 
with  which  such  an  epistle  could  be  written  ?      It  seems 


204  THE    FIRST    EPISTLE    TO    TIMOTHY. 

to  me  that  nothing  but  reality,  that  is,  the  real  valetudi- 
nary situation  of  a  real  person,  could  have  suggested  a 
thought  of  so  domestic  a  nature. 

But,  if  the  peculiarity  of  the  advice  be  observable,  the 
place  in  which  it  stands  is  more  so.  The  context  is  this : 
"  Lay  hands  suddenly  on  no  man,  neither  be  partaker  of 
other  men's  sins:  keep  thyself  pure.  Drink  no  longer 
water,  but  use  a  little  wine  for  thy  stomach's  sake  and 
thine  often  infirmities.  Some  men's  sins  are  open  before- 
hand, going  before  to  judgment ;  and  some  men  they 
follow  after."  The  direction  to  Timothy  about  his  diet 
stands  between  two  sentences  as  wide  from  the  subject 
as  possible.  The  train  of  thought  seems  to  be  broken  to 
let  it  in.  Now  when  does  this  happen  ?  It  happens 
when  a  man  writes  as  he  remembers  ;  when  he  puts 
down  an  article  that  occurs  the  moment  it  occurs,  lest  he 
should  afterwards  forget  it.  Of  this  the  passage  before 
us  bears  strongly  the  appearance.  Jn  actual  letters,  in 
the  negligence  of  real  correspondence,  examples  of  this 
kind  frecpjently  take  place  ;  seldom,  I  believe,  in  any 
other  production.  For  the  moment  a  man  regards  what 
he  writes  as  a  composition,  which  the  author  of  a  forgery 
would,  of  all  others,  be  the  first  to  do,  notions  of  order,  in 
the  arrangement  and  succession  of  his  thoughts,  present 
themselves  to  his  judgment,  and  guide  his  pen. 


No.  V. 

Chap.  i.  15,  16.  "  This  is  a  faithful  saying,  and  worthy 
of  all  acceptation,  that  Christ  Jesus  came  into  the  world 
to  save  sinners  ;  of  whom  I  am  chief,  llowbeit,  for  this 
cause  I  obtained   mercy,  that  in  me  first  Jesus  Christ 


THE    FlilST    EPISTLE    TO    TIMOTHY.  205 

might  show  forth  all  long-suffering,  for  a  pattern  to  them 
which  should  hereafter  believe  in  him  to  life  everlasting." 
What  was  the  mercy  which  St.  Paul  here  commemo- 
rates, and  what  was  the  crime  of  which  he  accuses  him- 
self, is  apparent  from  the  verses  immediately  preceding: 
'*  I  thank  Christ  Jesus  our  Lord,  who  hath  enabled  me, 
for  that  he  counted  me  faithful,  putting  me  into  the  min- 
istry ;  who  was  before  a  blasphemer,  and  a  persecutor,  and 
injurious  :  but  I  obtained  mercy,  because  I  did  it  igno- 
rantly  in  unbelief:"  chap.  i.  12,  13.  The  whole  quota- 
tion plainly  refers  to  St.  Paul's  original  enmity  to  the 
Christian  name,  the  interposition  of  Providence  in  his 
conversion,  and  his  subsequent  designation  to  the  minis- 
try of  the  Gospel:  and  by  this  reference  affirms- indeed 
the  substance  of  the  Apostle's  history  delivered  in  the 
Acts,  But  what  in  the  passage  strikes  my  mind  most 
powerfully  is  the  observation  that  is  raised  out  of  the  fact. 
"  For  this  cause  I  obtained  mercy,  that  in  me  first  Jesus 
Christ  might  show  forth  all  long-suffering,  for  a  pattern 
to  them  which  should  hereafter  believe  on  him  to  life 
everlasting."  It  is  a  just  and  solemn  reflection,  spring- 
ing from  the  circumstances  of  the  author's  conversion,  or 
rather  from  the  impression  which  that  great  event  had 
left  upon  his  memory.  It  will  be  said,  perhaps,  that  an 
impostor,  acquainted  with  St.  Paul's  history,  may  have 
put  such  a  sentiment  into  his  mouth  ;  or,  what  is  the  same 
thing,  into  a  letter  drawn  up  in  his  name.  But  where, 
we  may  ask,  is  such  an  impostor  to  be  found  ?  The  piety, 
the  truth,  the  benevolence  of  the  thought,  ought  to  pro- 
tect it  from  this  imputation.  For,  though  we  should 
allow  that  one  of  the  great  masters  of  the  ancient  tragedy 
could  have  given  to  his  scene  a  sentiment  as  virtuous  and 
as  elevated  as  this  is,  and  at  the  same  time  as  apropriate, 
and  as  well  suited  to  the  particular  situation  of  th# person 


206  THE    FIRST    EPISTLE    TO    TIMOTHY. 

who  delivers  it ;  yet  whoever  is  conversant  in  these 
inquiries  will  acknowledge  that,  to  do  this  in  a  fictitious 
production,  is  beyond  the  reach  of  the  understandings 
which  have  been  employed  upon  any  fabrications  that 
have  come  down  to  us  under  Christian  names. 


CHAPTER  XII 

THE  SECOND  EPISTLE  TO  TIMOTHY. 
No.    I. 

It  was  the  uniform  tradition  of  the  primitive  church, 
that  St.  Paul  visited  Rome  twice,  and  twice  there  suffered 
imprisonment :  and  that  he  was  put  to  death  at  Rome  at 
the  conclusion  of  his  second  imprisonment.  This  opinion 
concerning  St.  Paul's  tivo  journeys  to  Rome  is  confirmed 
by  a  great  variety  of  hints  and  allusions  in  the  epistle 
before  us,  compared  with  what  fell  from  the  Apostle's 
pen  in  other  letters  purporting  to  have  been  written  from 
Rome.  That  our  present  epistle  was  written  whilst  St. 
Paul  was  a  prisoner-  is  distinctly  intimated  by  the  eighth 
verse  of  the  first  chapter:  "Re  not  thou  therefore 
ashamed  of  the  testimony  of  our  Lord,  nor  of  me  his 
prisoner."  And  whilst  he  was  a  prisoner  at  Rome,  by 
the  sixteenth  and  seventeenth  verses  of  the  same  chap- 
ter :  u  The  Lord  gave  mercy  unto  the  house  of  Onesi- 
phorus  ;  for  he  oft  refreshed  me,  and  was  not  ashamed 
of  my  chain  :  but  when  he  was  in  Rome  he  sought  me  out 
very  diligently,  and  found  me."  Since  it  appears  from 
the  former  quotation  that  St.  Paul  wrote  this  epistle  in 
confinement,  it  will  hardly  admit  of  doubt  that  the  word 
chain,  in  the  latter  quotation,  refers  to  that  confinement ; 
the  chain  by  which  he  was  then  bound,  the  custody  in 
which  he  was  then  kept.  And  if  the  word  "  chain"'  desig- 
nate the  author's  confinement  at  the  time  of  writing  the 


208  THE    SECOND    EPISTLE    TO    TIMOTHY. 

epistle,  the  next  words  determine  it  to  have  been  written 
from  Rome :  "  He  was  not  ashamed  of  my  chain  ;  but, 
when  he  was  in  Rome,  he  sought  me  out  very  diligently." 
Now,  that  it  was  not  written  during  the  Apostle's  first 
imprisonment  at  Rome,  or  during  the  same  imprisonment 
in  which  the  epistles  to  the  Ephesians,  the  Colossians,  the 
Philippians,  and  Philemon,  were  written,  may  be  gathered, 
with  considerable  evidence,  from  a  comparison  of  these 
several  epistles  with  the  present. 

I.  In  the  former  epistles  the  author  confidently  looked 
forward  to  his  liberation  from  confinement,  and  his  speedy 
departure  from  Rome.  He  tells  the  Philippians  (chap, 
ii.  24),  "  1  trust  in  the  Lord  that  I  also  myself  shall  come 
shortly."  Philemon  he  bids  to  prepare  for  him  a  lodg- 
ing :  "  For  I  trust,"  says  he,  "  that,  through  your  prayers, 
I  shall  be  given  unto  you  :"  ver.  22.  In  the  epistle  be- 
fore us  he  holds  a  language  extremely  different :  "  I  am 
now  ready  to  be  offered,  and  the  time  of  my  departure 
is  at  hand.  I  have  fought  a  good  fight,  I  have  finished 
my  course,  I  have  kept  the  faith  :  henceforth  there  is  laid 
up  for  me  a  crown  of  righteousness,  which  the  Lord, 
the  righteous  Judge,  shall  give  me  at  that  day  :"  chap. 
iv!  C— 8. 

II.  When  the  former  epistles  were  written  from  Rome, 
Timothy  was  with  St.  Paul  ;  and  is  joined  with  him  in 
writing  to  the  Colossians,  the  Philippians,  and  to  Phile- 
mon.    The  present  epistle  implies  that  he  was  absent. 

III.  In  the  former  epistles  Demas  was  with  St.  Paul, 
at  Rome :  u  Luke,  the  beloved  physician,  and  Demas 
greets  you."  In  the  epistle  now  before  us,  "Demas  hath 
forsaken  me,  having  loved  this  present  world,  and  is  gone 
to  Thessalonica." 

IV.  In  the  former  epistles,  Mark  was  with  St.  Paul, 
and  joins  in  saluting  the  Colossians.     In  the  present  epis- 


THE    SECOND    EPISTLE    TO    TIMOTHV.  209 

tie,  Timothy  is  ordered  to  bring  him  with  him, "  for  he  is 
profitable  to  me  for  the  ministry  :"  chap.  iv.  11. 

The  case  of  Timothy  and  of  Mark  might  be  very  well 
accounted  for,  by  supposing  the  present  epistle  to  have 
been  written  before  the  others ;  so  that  Timothy,  who  is 
here  exhorted  "  to  come  shortly  unto  him,"  (chap.  iv.  9), 
might  have  arrived,  and  that  Mark,  "  whom  he  was  to 
bring  with  him,"  (chap.  iv.  11),  might  have  also  reached 
Rome  in  sufficient  time  to  have  been  with  St.  Paul  when 
the  four  epistles  were  written ;  but  then  such  a  supposi- 
tion is  inconsistent  with  what  is  said  of  Demas,  by  which 
the  posteriority  of  this  to  the  other  epistles  is  strongly  in- 
dicated :  for,  in  the  other  epistles,  Demas  was  with  St. 
Paul,  in  the  present  he  hath  "  forsaken  him,  and  is  gone 
to  Thessalonica."  The  opposition  also  of  sentiment,  with 
respect  to  the  event  of  the  persecution,  is  hardly  recon- 
cilable to  the  same  imprisonment. 

The  two  following  considerations  which  were  first  sug- 
gested upon  this  question  by  Ludovicus  Capellus,  are  still 
more  conclusive. 

1.  In  the  twentieth  verse  of  the  fourth  chapter  St.  Paul 
informs  Timothy  "  that  Erastus  abode  at  Corinth,"  Egua- 
tog  Efifuev  ev  KoqivOw.  The  form  of  expression  implies 
that  Erastus  had  staid  behind  at  Corinth  when  St.  Paul 
left  it.  But  this  could  not  be  meant  of  any  journey  from 
Corinth  which  St.  Paul  took  prior  to  his  first  imprison- 
ment at  Rome  ;  for  when  Paul  departed  from  Corinth,  as 
related  in  the  twentieth  chapter  of  the  Acts,  Timothy  was 
with  him  :  and  this  was  the  last  time  the  apostle  left  Cor- 
inth before  his  coming  to  Rome ;  because  he  left  it  to 
proceed  on  his  way  to  Jerusalem  ;  soon  after  his  arrival 
at  which  place  he  was  taken  into  custody,  and  continued 
in  that  custody  till  he  was  carried  to  Caesar's  tribunal. 
There  could  be  no  need  therefore  to  inform  Timothy  that 


210  THE    SECOND    EPISTLE    TO    TIMOTHY. 

"  Erastus  staid  behind  at  Corinth"  upon  this  occasion,  be- 
cause if  the  fact  was  so,  it  must  have  been  known  to  Tim- 
othy, who  was  present,  as  well  as  to  St.  Paul. 

2.  In  the  same  verse  our  epistle  also  states  the  following 
article  :  "  Trophimus  have  I  left  at  Miletum  sick."  When 
St.  Paul  passed  through  Miletum  on  his  way  to  Jerusa- 
lem, as  related  Acts,  xx.,  Trophimus  was  not  left  behind, 
but  accompanied  him  to  that  city.  He  was  indeed  the 
occasion  of  the  uproar  at  Jerusalem,  in  consequence  of 
which  St.  Paul  was  apprehended ;  for,  "  they  had  seen/' 
says  the  historian,  "  before  with  him  in  the  city,  Trophi- 
mus, an  Ephesian,  whom  they  supposed  that  Paul  had 
brought  into  the  temple.'"'  This  was  evidently  the  last 
time  of  Paul's  being  at  Miletus  before  his  first  imprison- 
ment ;  for,  as  hath  been  said,  after  his  apprehension  at 
Jerusalem,  he  remained  in  custody  till  he  was  sent  to 
Rome. 

In  these  two  articles  we  have  a  journey  referred  to 
which  must  have  taken  place  subsequent  to  the  conclusion 
of  St.  Luke's  history,  and,  of  course,  after  St.  Paul's  lib- 
eration from  his  first  imprisonment.  The  epistle  there- 
fore, which  contains  this  reference,  since  it  appears,  from 
other  parts  of  it,  to  have  been  written  while  St.  Paul  was 
a  prisoner  at  Rome,  proves  that  he  had  returned  to  that 
city  again,  and  undergone  there  a  second  imprisonment. 

I  do  not  produce  these  particulars  for  the  sake  of  the 
support  which  they  lend  to  the  testimony  of  the  fathers 
concerning  St.  Paul's  second  imprisonment,  but  to  remark 
their  consistency  and  agreement  with  one  another.  They 
are  all  resolvable  into  one  supposition:  and,  although 
the  supposition  itself  be  in  some  sort  only  negative,  I  /*. 
that  the  epistle  was  not  written  during  St.  Paul's  first 
residence  at  Rome,  but  in  some  future  imprisonment  in 
that  city ;  yet  is  the  consistency  not  less  worthy  of  ob- 


THE    SECOND    EPISTLE    TO    TIMOTUV.  211 

servation :  for  the  epistle  touches  upon  names  and  cir- 
cumstances connected  with  the  date  and  with  the  history 
of  tho  first  imprisonment,  and  mentioned  in  letters  writ- 
ten during  that  imprisonment,  and  so  touches  upon  them 
as  to  leave  what  is  said  of  one  consistent  with  what  is 
said  of  others,  and  consistent  also  with  what  is  said  of 
them  in  different  epistles.  Had  one  of  these  circum- 
stances been  so  described  as  to  have  fixed  the  date  of  the 
epistle  to  the  first  imprisonment,  it  would  have  involved 
the  rest  in  contradiction.  And  when  the  number  and 
particularity  of  the  articles  which  have  been  brought  to- 
gether under  this  head  are  considered  ;  and  when  it  is 
considered,  also,  that  the  comparisons  we  have  formed 
amongst  them  were  in  all  probability  neither  provided 
for,  nor  thought  of  by  the  writer  of  the  epistle,  it  will  be 
deemed  something  very  like  the  effect  of  truth,  that  no 
invincible  repugnancy  is  perceived  between  them. 


No.   II. 

In  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  in  the  sixteenth  chapter, 
and  at  the  first  verse,  we  are  told  that  Paul  "  came  to 
Derbe  and  Lystra,  and,  behold,  a  certain  disciple  was 
there,  named  Timotheus,  the  son  of  a  certain  woman 
which  was  a  Jewess,  and  believed  ;  but  his  father  was  ;i 
Greek."  In  the  epistle  before  us,  in  the  first  chapter,  and 
at  the  fourth  verse,  St.  Paul  writes  to  Timothy,  thus : 
"Greatly  desiring  to  see  thee,  being  mindful  of  thy  tears, 
that  1  may  be  filled  with  joy,  when  1  call  to  remembrance 
the  unfeigned  faith  that  is  in  thee,  which  dwelt  first  in 
thy  grandmother  Lois,  and  thy  mother  Eunice  :  and  I  am 
persuaded  that  in  thee  also."  Here  we  have  a  fair  un- 
forced example  of  coincidence.      In  the  history.  Timothy 


212  TFIE    SECOND    EPISTLE    TO    TIMOTHY. 

was  the  "  son  of  a  Jewess  that  believed  ;"  in  the  epistle, 
St.  Paul  applauds,  "the  faith  which  dwelt  in  his  mother 
Eunice."  In  the  history  it  is  said  of  the  mother,^'  that 
she  was  a  Jewess,  and  believed  ;"  of  the  father,  "  that  he 
was  a  Greek."  Now,  when  it  is  said  of  the  mother  alone 
"  that  she  believed,"  the  father  being,  nevertheless,  men- 
tioned in  the  same  sentence,  we  are  led  to  suppose  of  the 
father,  that  he  did  not  believe,  i.  e.  either  that  he  was 
dead,  or  that  he  remained  unconverted.  Agreeably  here- 
unto, whilst  praise  is  bestowed  in  the  epistle,  upon  one 
parent,  and  upon  her  sincerity  in  the  faith,  no  notice  is 
taken  of  the  other.  The  mention  of  the  grandmother  is 
the  addition  of  a  circumstance  not  found  in  the  history ; 
but  it  is  a  circumstance  which,  as  well  as  the  names  of 
the  parties,  might  naturally  be  expected  to  be  known  to 
the  apostle,  though  overlooked  by  his  historian. 


No.  III. 

Chop.  iii.  15.  "And  that  from  a  child  thou  hast  known 
the  Holy  Scriptures,  which  are  able  to  make  thee  wise 
unto  salvation." 

This  verse  discloses  a  circumstance  which  agrees  ex- 
actly with  what  is  intimated  in  the  quotation  from  the 
Acts,  adduced  in  the  last  number.  In  that  quotation  it  is 
recorded  of  Timothy's  mother,  "  that  she  was  a  Jewess." 
This  description  is  virtually,  though  I  am  satisfied,  unde- 
signedly, recognized  in  the  epistle,  when  Timothy  is  re- 
minded in  it,  Ct  that  from  a  child  he  had  known  the  Holy 
Scriptures.''  "  The  Holy  Scriptures"  undoubtedly  meant 
the  Scriptures  of  the  Old  Testament.  The  expression 
bears  that  sense  in  every  place  in  which  it  occurs.  Those 
of  the  New  had  not  yet  acquired  the  name ;  not  to  men- 


THE    SECOND    EPISTLE    TO    TIMOTHY.  213 

tion  that,  in  Timothy's  childhood,  probably  none  of  them 
existed.  In  what  manner,  then,  could  Timothy  have 
"known  from  a  child"  the  Jewish  Scriptures,  had  he  not 
been  born,  on  one  side  or  on  both,  of  Jewish  parentage  ? 
Perhaps  he  was  not  less  likely  to  be  carefully  instructed 
in  them,  for  that  his  mother  alone  professed  that  religion. 


No.  IV. 

Chap.  ii.  22.  "  Flee  also  youthful  lusts  :  but  follow 
righteousness,  faith,  charity,  peace,  with  them  than  call 
on  the  Lord  out  of  a  pure  heart." 

a  Flee  also  youthful  lusts."  The  suitableness  of  this 
precept  to  the  age  of  the  person  to  whom  it  is  addressed, 
is  gathered  from  1  Tim.  chap.  iv.  12  :  Let  no  man  de- 
spise thy  youth."  Nor  do  I  deem  the  less  of  this  coinci- 
dence, because  the  propriety  resides  in  a  single  epithet ; 
or  because  this  one  precept  is  joined  with,  and  followed 
by  a  train  of  others,  not  more  applicable  to  Timothy  than 
to  any  ordinary  convert.  It  is  in  these  transient  and 
cursory  allusions  that  the  argument  is  best  founded. 
When  a  writer  dwells  and  rests  upon  a  point  in  which 
some  coincidence  is  discerned,  it  may  be  doubted  whether 
he  himself  had  not  fabricated  the  conformity,  and  was 
endeavoring  to  display  and  set  it  oft*.  But  when  the  ref- 
erence is  contained  in  a  single  word,  unobserved,  per- 
haps, by  most  readers,  the  writer  passing  on  to  other 
subjects,  as  unconscious  that  he  had  hit  upon  a  corres- 
pondency, or  unsolicitous  whether  it  were  remarked  or 
not,  we  may  be  pretty  well  assured  that  no  fraud  was 
exercised,  no  imposition  intended. 


214  THE    SECOND    EPISTLE    TO    TIMOTHY. 


No  V. 

Chap.  iii.  10,  11.  "But  thou  hast  fully  known  my 
doctrine,  manner  of  life,  purpose,  faith,  long-suffering, 
charity,  patience,  persecutions,  afflictions,  which  came 
unto  me  at  Antioch,  at  Iconium,  at  Lystra ;  what  per- 
secutions I  endured ;  but  out  of  them  all  the  Lord  de- 
livered me." 

The  Antioch  here  mentioned  was  not  Antioch  the  cap- 
ital of  Syria,  where  Paul  and  Barnabas  resided  "  a  long 
time ;"  but  Antioch  in  Pisidia,  to  which  place  Paul  and 
Barnabas  came  in  their  first  apostolic  progress,  and  where 
Paul  delivered  a  memorable  discourse,  which  is  preserved 
in  the  thirteenth  chapter  of  the  Acts.  At  this  Antioch 
the  history  relates  that  the  "  Jews  stirred  up  the  devout 
and  honorable  women,  and  the  chief  men  of  the  city, 
and  raised  persecution  against  Paul  and  Barnabas,  and 
expelled  them  out  of  their  coasts.  But  they  shook  off  the 
dust  of  their  feet  against  them,  and  came  into  Iconium 
.  .  .  And  it  came  to  pass  in  Iconium,  that  they  went 
both  together  into  the  synagogue  of  the  Jews,  and  so 
spake  that  a  great  multitude  both  of  the  Jews  and  also 
of  the  Greeks  believed ;  but  the  unbelieving  Jews  stirred 
up  the  Gentiles,  and  made  their  minds  evil-affected  against 
the  brethren.  Long  time,  therefore,  abode  they  speaking 
boldly  in  the  Lord,  which  gave  testimony  unto  the  word 
of  his  grace,  and  granted  signs  and  wonders  to  be  done 
by  their  hands.  But  the  multitude  of  the  city  was  divi- 
ded ;  and  part  held  with  the  Jews,  and  pait  with  the 
apostles.  And  when  there  was  an  assault  made,  both  of 
the  Gentiles  and  also  of  the  Jews,  with  their  rulers,  to 
use  them  despitefully,  and  to  stone  than,  they  were  aware 
of  it.  and  fled  into  Lystra  and  Derbe,  cities  of  Lycaonia, 


THE    SECOXD    EPISTLE    TO    TIMOTHY.  215 

and  unto  the  region  that  lieth  round  about,  and  there  they 
preached  the  Gospel  ....  And  there  came  thither 
certain  Jews  from  Antioch  and  Iconium,  who  persuaded 
the  people,  and,  having  stoned  Paul,  drew  him  out  of  the 
city,  supposing  he  had  been  dead.  Howbeit,  as  the  dis- 
ciples stood  round  about  him,  he  rose  up  and  came  into 
the  city ;  and  the  next  day  he  departed  with  Barnabas  to 
Derbe :  and  when  they  had  preached  the  Gospel  to  that 
city,  and  had  taught  many,  they  returned  again  to  Lystra, 
and  to  Iconium,  and  to  Antioch."  This  account  com- 
prises the  period  to  which  the  allusion  in  the  epistle  is  to 
be  referred.  We  have  so  far,  therefore,  a  conformity  be- 
tween the  history  and  the  epistle,  that  St.  Paul  is  asserted 
in  the  history  to  have  suffered  persecution  in  the  three 
cities,  his  persecutions  at  which  are  appealed  to  in  the 
epistle;  and  not  only  so,  but  to  have  suffered  these  per- 
secution!, both  in  immediate  succession,  and  in  the  order 
in  which  the  cities  are  mentioned  in  the  epistle.  The 
conformity  also  extends  to  another  circumstance.  In  the 
apostolic  history,  Lystra  and  Derbe  are  commonly  men- 
tioned together  :  in  the  quotation  from  the  epistle,  Lystra 
is  mentioned,  and  not  Derbe.  And  the  distinction  will 
appear  on  this  occasion  to  be  accurate ;  for  St.  Paul  is 
here  enumerating  his  persecutions:  and,  although  he  un- 
derwent grievous  persecutions  in  each  of  the  three  cities 
through  which  he  passed  to  Derbe,  at  Derbe  itself  he  met 
with  none:  "The  next  day  he  departed,''  says  the  histo- 
rian, "  to  Derbe ;  and,  when  they  had  preached  the  Gos- 
pel to  that  city,  and  had  taught  many,  they  returned  a 
to  Lystra."'  The  epistle,  therefore,  in  the  names  of  the 
cities,  in  the  order  in  which  they  are  enumerated,  and  in 
the  place  at  which  the  enumeration  stops,  corresponds 
exactly  with  the  history. 

But  a  second  question  remains,  namely,  how  these  per- 


216  THE    SECOND    EPISTLE    TO    TIMOTHY. 

secutions  were  "  known"  to  Timothy,  or  why  the  apostle 
should  recall  these-  in  particular  to  his  remembrance, 
rather  than  many  other  persecutions  with  which  his  min- 
istry had  been  attended.  When  some  time,  probably 
three  years  afterwards  (vide  Pearson's  Annales  Paulinas,) 
St.  Paul  made  a  second  journey  through  the  same  coun- 
try, "  in  order  to  go  again  and  visit  the  brethren  in  every 
city  where  he  had  preached  the  word  of  the  Lord,"  we 
read,  Acts,  chap.  xvi.  1,  that  "  when  he  came  to  Derbe 
and  Lystra,  behold,  a  certain  disciple  was  there,  named 
Timotheus."  One  or  other,  therefore,  of  these  cities,  was 
the  place  of  Timothy's  abode.  We  read,  moreover,  that 
he  was  well  reported  of  by  the  brethren  that  were  at 
Lystra  and  Iconium  ;  so  that  he  must  have  been  well  ac- 
quainted with  these  places.  Also,  again,  when  Paul  came 
to  Derbe  and  Lystra,  Timothy  was  already  a  disciple  ; 
"Behold  a  certain  disciple  was  there  named  Timotheus." 
He  must,  therefore,  have  been  converted  before.  But 
since  it  is  expressly  stated  in  the  epistle  that  Timothy  was 
converted  by  St.  Paul  himself,  that  he  was  "  his  own  son  in 
the  faith ;"  it  follows  that  he  must  have  been  converted 
by  him  upon  his  former  journey  into  those  parts ;  which 
was  the  very  time  when  the  apostle  underwent  the  perse- 
cutions referred  to  in  the  epistle.  Upon  the  whole,  then, 
persecutions  at  the  several  cities  named  in  the  epistle  are 
expressly  recorded  in  the  Acts ;  and  Timothy's  knowl- 
■  of  this  part  of  St.  Paul's  history,  which  knowledge 
Is  appealed  to  in  the  epistle,  is  fairly  deduced  from  the 
place  of  his  abode,  and  the  time  of  his  conversion.  It 
mayfarther  be  observed  that  it  is  probable  from  this  ac- 
count that.  St.  Paul  was  in  the  midst  of  those  persecutions 
when  Timothy  became  known  to  him.  No  wonder,  then, 
that  the  apostle,  though  in  a  letter   writen  long  after- 


THE    SECOND    EPISTLE    TO    TIMOTHY.  217 

wards,  should  remind  his  favorite  convert  of  those  scenes 
of  affliction  and  distress  under  which  they  first  met. 

Although  this  coincidence,  as  to  the  names  of  the  cities, 
be  more  specific  and  direct  than  many  which  we  have 
pointed  out ;  yet  I  apprehend  there  is  no  just  reason  for 
thinking  it  to  be  artificial ;  for  had  the  writer  of  the  epis- 
tle sought  a  coincidence  with  the  history  upon  this  head, 
and  searched  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  for  the  purpose,  I 
conceive  he  would  have  sent  us  at  once  to  Philippi  and 
Thessalonica,  where  Paul  suffered  persecution,  and  where, 
from  what  is  stated,  it  may  easily  be  gathered  that  Timo- 
thy accompanied  him,  rather  than  have  appealed  to  per- 
secutions as  known  to  Timothy,  in  the  account  of  which 
persecutions  Timothy's  presence  is  not  mentioned  ;  it  not 
being  till  after  one  entire  chapter,  and  in  the  history  of  a 
journey  three  years  futurj  to  this,  that  Timothy's  name 
occurs  in  the  Acts  $f  *h<2  /  postles  for  the  first  time. 

10 


CHAPTER  XIII. 

THE  EPISTLE  TO  TITUS. 
No.     I. 

A  very  characteristic  circumstance  in  this  epistle  is  the 
quotation  from  Epimenides,  chap.  i.  12  ;  "One  of  them- 
selves, even  a  prophet  of  their  own,  said,  The  Cretans  are 
always  liars,  evil  beasts,  slow  bellies." 

Koijtes  an  ipivcrai,  KO.KU  OripiOj  yaurepe;  apyat. 

I  call  this  quotation  characteristic,  because  no  writer 
in  the  New  Testament,  except  St.  Paul,  appealed  to 
heathen  testimony,  and  because  St.  Paul  repeatedly  did 
so.  In  his  celebrated  speech  at  Athens,  preserved  in  the 
seventeenth  chapter  of  the  Acts,  he  tells  his  audience  that 
"  in  God  we  live,  and  move,  and  have  our  being ;  as  cer- 
tain also  of  your  own  poets  have  said,  For  we  are  also 
his  offspring." 

m  yap  Kai  ytvo;  tafiiv. 

The  reader  will  perceive  much  similarity  of  manner  in 
these  two  passages.  The  reference  in  the  speech  is  to  a 
heathen  poet  ;  it  is  the  same  in  the  epistle.  In  the  speech, 
the  apostle  urges  his  hearers  with  the  authority  of  a  poet 
of  their  own  ;  in  the  epistle,  he  avails  himself  of  the  same 
advantage.  Yet  there  is  a  variation,  which  shows  that 
the  hint  of  inserting  a  quotation  in  the  epistle  was  not, 
as  it  may  be  expected,  borrowed  from  seeing  the  like 
practice  attributed  to  St.  Paul  in  the  history  ;  and  it  is 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    TITUS.  219 

this,  that  in  the  epistle  the  author  cited  is  called  a. prophet, 
';  one  of  themselves,  even  a  prophet  of  their  own." 
Whatever  might  be  the  reason  for  calling  Epimenides  a 
prophet ;  whether  the  names  of  poet  and  prophet  were 
occasionally  convertible  ;  whether  Epimenides  in  partic- 
ular had  obtained  that  title,  as  Grotius  seems  to  have 
proved  ;  or  whether  the  appellation  was  given  to  him,  in 
this  instance,  as  having  delivered  a  description  of  the 
Cretan  character  which  the  future  state  of  morals  among 
them  verified :  whatever  was  the  reason,  (and  any  of  these 
reasons  will  account  for  the  variation,  supposing  St.  Paul 
to  have  been  the  author.)  one  point  is  plain,  namely,  if  the 
epistle  had  been  forged,  and  the  author  had  inserted  a 
quotation  in  it  merely  from  having  seen  an  example  of 
the  same  kind  in  a  speech  ascribed  to  St.  Paul,  he  would 
so  farliave  imitated  his  original  as  to  have  introduced  his 
quotation  in  the  same  manner ;  that  is,  he  would  have 
given  to  Epimenides  the  title  which  he  saw  there  given 
to  Aratus.  The  other  side  of  the  alternative  is,  that  the 
history  took  the  hint  from  the  epistle.  But  that  the  au- 
thor of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  had  not  the  epistle  to 
Titus  before  him,  at  least  that  he  did  not  use  it  as  one  of 
the  documents  or  materials  of  his  narrative,  is  rendered 
nearly  certain  by  the  observation  that  the  name  of  Titus 
does  not  once  occur  in  his  book. 

It  is  well  known,  and  was  remarked  by  St.  Jerome, 
that  the  apothegm  in  the  fifteenth  chapter  of  the  Corin- 
thians, "'Evil  communications  corrupt  good  manners," 
is  an  Iambic  of  Menander's: 

(I>0£ip&<rii'  !j0»j  %p>it;0'  bfiiXiat  xaxai. 

Here  we  have  another  unaffected  instance  of  the  same 
turn  and  habit  of  composition.  Probably  there  are 
some  hitherto  unnoticed  :  and   more  which  the  loss  of 


220  THE    EPISTLE    TO    TITUS. 

the  original  authors  renders  impossible  to  be  now  ascer- 
tained. 


No.   II. 

There  exists  a  visible  affinity  between  the  Epistle  to  Ti- 
tus, and  the  First  Epistle  to  Timothy.  Both  letters  were 
addressed  to  persons  left  by  the  writer  to  preside  in  their 
respective  churches  during  his  absence.  Both  letters 
are  principally  occupied  in  describing  the  qualifications 
to  be  sought  for  in  those  whom  they  should  appoint  to 
offices  in  the  church ;  and  the  ingredients  of  this  descrip- 
tion are  in  both  letters  nearly  the  same.  Timothy  and 
Titus  are  likewise  cautioned  against  the  same  prevailing 
corruptions,  and,  in  particular,  against  the  same  misdirec- 
tion of  their  cares  and  studies.  This  affinity  obtains,  not 
only  jn  the  subject  of  the  letters,  which,  from  the  simi- 
larity of  situation  in  the  persons  to  whom  they  were  ad- 
dressed, might  be  expected  to  be  somewhat  alike,  but 
extends,  in  a  great  variety  of  instances,  to  the  phrases 
and  expressions.  The  writer  accosts  his  two  friends 
with  the  same  salutation,  and  passes  on  to  the  business  of 
his  letter  by  the  same  transition. 

"  Unto  Timothy,  my  own  son  in  the  faith ;  Grace, 
mercy,  and  peace,  from  God  our  Father,  and  Jesus  Christ 
our  Lord.  As  I  besought  thee  to  abide  still  at  Ephesus, 
when  I  went  into  Macedonia"  &c,  1  Tim.  chap.  i.  2,  3. 

"  To  Titus,  mine  own  son  after  the  common  faith  : 
Grace,  mercy,  and  peace,  from  God  the  Father,  and  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  our  Saviour.  For  this  cause  left  I 
thee  in  Crete."     Titus,  chap.  i.  4,  5. 

If  Timothy  was  not  to"  give  heed  to  fables  and  endless 
genealogies,  which  minister  questions,"  1  Tim.  chap.  i.  4 ; 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    TITUS.  221 

Titus  also  was  to  M  avoid  foolish  questions,  and  genealo- 
gies, and  contentions,  chap.  iii.  9  ;  and  was  to  "  rebuke 
them  sharply,  not  giving  heed  ty  Jewish  fables,"  chap.  i. 
14.  if  Timothy  was  to  be  a  pattern  (rimo;),  1.  Tim.  chap, 
iv.  12 ;  so  was  Titus,  chap.  ii.  7.  If  Timothy  was  to 
"  let  no  man  despise  his  youth,"  1  Tim.  chap.  iv.  12  ;  Ti- 
tus also  was  to  "let  no  man  despise  him,  chap.  ii.  15. 
This  verbal  consent  is  also  observable  in  some  very  pe- 
culiar expressions,  which  have  no  relation  to  the  particu- 
lar character  of  Timothy  or  Titus. 

The  phrase,  "it  is  a  faithful  saying,"  (mircos  6  loyo;), 
made  use  of  to  preface  some  sentence  upon  which  the 
writer  lays  a  more  than  ordinary  stress,  occurs  three 
times  in  the  First  Epistle  to  Timothy,  once  in  the  Second, 
snd  once  in  the  epistle  before  us,  and  in  no  other  part 
of  St.  Paul's  writings ;  and  it  is  remarkable  that  these 
three  epistles  were  probably  all  written  towards  the  con- 
clusion of  his  life  ;  and  that  they  are  the  only  epistles 
which  were  written  after  his  first  imprisonment  at  Rome. 

The  same  observation  belongs  to  another  singularity 
of  expression,  and  that  is  in  the  epithet  "  sound"  (i5}tcu>w), 
as  applied  to  words  or  doctrine.  It  is  thus  used  twice  in 
the  First  Epistle  to  Timothy,  twice  in  the  Second,  and 
three  times  in  the  Epistle  to  Titus,  besides  two  cognate 
expressions,  iyitxivovrag  t>/  motet,  and,  )<oyov  byuj ;  and  it  is 
found,  in  the  same  sense,  in  no  other  part  of  the  New 
Testament 

The  phrase,  "God  our  Saviour,"  stands  in  nearly  the 
same  predicament.  It  is  repeated  three  times  in  the  First 
Epistle  to  Timothy,  as  many  in  the  Epistle  to  Titus,  and 
in  no  other  book  of  the  New  Testament  occurs  at  all, 
except  once  in  the  Epistle  of  Jude. 

Similar  terms,  intermixed  indeed  with  others,  are  em- 
ployed  in  the   two  epistles,  in  enumerating  the  qualifi- 


222  THE    EPISTLE    TO    TITUS. 

cations  required  in  those  who  should  be  advanced  to  sta- 
tions of  authority  in  the  church. 

"A  bishop  must  be  blameless,  the  husband  of  one  wife, 
vigilant,  sober,  of  good  behavior,  given  to  hospitality,  apt 
to  teach,  not  given  to  wine,  no  striker,  not  greedy  of  filthy 
lucre ;  but  patient,  not  a  brawler,  not  covetous ;  one  that 
ruleth  well  his  own  house,  having  his  children  in  sub- 
jection with  all  gravity."  *     1  Tim.  chap.  iii.  2 — 4. 

"  If  any  be  blameless,  the  husband  of  one  wife,  having 
faithful  children,  not  accused  of  riot,  or  unruly.  For  a 
bishop  must  be  blameless,  as  the  steward  of  God ;  not 
self-willed,  not  soon  angry,  not  given  to  wine,  no  striker, 
not  given  to  filthy  lucre ;  but  a  lover  of  hospitality,  a  lover 
of  good  men,  sober,  just,  holy,  temperate."  f  Titus,  chap, 
i.  G— 8. 

The  most  natural  account  which  can  be  given  of  these 
resemblances  is  to  suppose  that  the  two' epistles  were 
written  nearly  at  the  same  time,  and  whilst  the  same 
ideas  and  phrases  dwelt  in  the  writer's  mind.  Let  us 
inquire,  therefore,  whether  the  notes  of  time,  extant  in 
the  two  epistles,  in  any  manner  favor  this  supposition. 

We  have  seen  that  it  was  necessary  to  refer  the  First 
Epistle  to  Timothy  to  a  date  subsequent  to  St.  Paul's 
first  imprisonment  at  Rome,  because  there  was  no  journey 
into  Macedonia  prior  to  that  event  which  accorded  with 
the  circumstance  of  leaving  "  Timothy  behind  at  Ephe- 
sus."     The  journey  of  St.  Paul  from  Crete,  alluded  to  in 

*  "Ati  vvtov  CTtrjKOTTOv  avtuCf^TtTOV  cii'at,  tuns  yvi'aiKo;  av&pa,vr)J:a'Siov,  ntatipova, 
Kocrmov  <bi\o%tvovt  StdaKTiKov,  pn  itapoivov,  pn  Tt'XrjKrni;  p>]  ma^poxtpiri'  a\\'  e-iciKt], 
apaxov,  a<pt\apyvpov'  tu  t<5i«  oikh  Ka\o>s  -npoiarapevov,  TCKva  c%ovra  ev  vzorayiipcra 
•xaaris  acpvorriros." 

f  "  E(  tu  cctiv  aveyK^riTOS,  ptaf  yvvaixosavrip,  TCKva  s^tov  jr(ora,  /tij  tv  Karvyopia 
anuria;,  ij  ui/vtotiiktii.  Act  yap  tov  txiGKuzav  avcyn\r)Tov  tivai,  to;  Ocav  oitcoiopoi', 
pr)  avQaSn,  pn  opyt>ov,  prj  rrapotvuv,  pi]  v\<]ktj]v,  /<j;  atcxponcpSn'  a\\a  <pi\o&ot;  <pi\a- 
yadov,  cwppova,  <J(*ni9i,  bin  v,  gy»rparij." 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    TITUS.  223 

the  epistle  before  us,  and  in  which  Titus  "  was  left  in 
Crete  to  set  in  order  the  things  that  were  wanting,"  must, 
in  like  manner,  be  carried  to  the  period  which  intervened, 
between  his  first  and  second  imprisonment.  For  the  his- 
tory, which  reaches,  we  know,  to  the  time  of  St.  Paul's 
first  imprisonment,  contains  no  account  of  his  going  to 
Crete,  except  upon  his  voyage  as  a  prisoner  to  Rome; 
and  that  this  could  not  be  the  occasion  referred  to  in  our 
epistle  is  evident  from  hence,  that  when  St.  Paul  wrote 
this  epistle,  he  appears  to  have  been  at  liberty ;  where- 
as, after  that  voyage,  he  continued  for  two  years  at  least 
in  confinement.  Again,  it  is  agreed  that  St.  Paul  wrote 
his  First  Epistle  to  Timothy  from  Macedonia :  "  As  I  be- 
sought thee  to  abide  still  at  Ephesus,  when  I  went  (or 
came)  into  Macedonia."  And  that  he  was  in  these  parts 
i.  e.  in  this  peninsula,  when  he  wrote  the  Epistle  to  Titus, 
is  rendered  probable  by  his  directing  Titus  to  come  to 
him  to  Nicopolis :  "  When  I  shall  send  Artemas  unto  thee, 
or  Tychicus,  be  diligent  (make  haste)  to  come  unto  me 
to  Nicopolis :  for  I  have  determined  there  to  winter." 
The  most  noted  city  of  that  name  was  in  Epirus,  near  to 
Actium.  And  I  think  the  form  of  speaking,  as  well  as 
the  nature  of  the  case,  renders  it  probable  that  the  writer 
was  at  Nicopolis,  or  in  the  neighborhood  thereof,  when 
he  dictated  this  direction  to  Titus. 

Upon  the  whole,  if  we  may  be  allowed  to  suppose  that 
St.  Paul,  after  his  liberation  at  Rome,  sailed  into  Asia, 
taking  Crete  in  his  way ;  that  from  Asia  and  from  Ephe- 
sus, the  capital  of  that  country,  he  proceeded  into  Mace- 
donia, and  crossing  the  peninsula  in  his  progress,  came 
into  the  neighborhood  of  Nicopolis ;  we  have  a  route 
which  falls  in  with  every  thing.  It  executes  the  intention 
expressed  by  the  apostle  of  visiting  Colosse  and  Philippi 
as  soon  as  he  should  be  set  at  liberty  at  Rome.     It  allows 


224  THE    EPISTLE    TO    TITUS. 

him  to  leave  "  Titus  at  Crete,"  and  "  Timothy  at  Ephesus, 
as  he  went  into  Macedonia  ;"  and  to  write  to  both  not 
Jong  after  from  the  peninsula  of  Greece,  and  probably  the 
neighborhood  of  Nicopolis :  thus  bringing  together  the 
dates  of  these  two  letters,  and  thereby  accounting  for 
that  affinity  between  them,  both  in  subject  and  language, 
which  our  remarks  have  pointed  out.  I  confess  that  the 
journey  which  we  have  thus  traced  out  for  St.  Paul  is  in 
a  great  measure  hypothetic :  but  it  should  be  observed 
that  it  is  a  species  of  consistency  which  seldom  belongs 
to  falsehood,  to  admit  of  an  hypothesis  which  includes  a 
great  number  of  independent  circumstances  without  con- 
tradiction. 


CHAPTER  XIV. 

THE  EPISTLE  TO  PHILEMON. 
No.    I. 

The  singular  correspondency  between  this  epistle  and 
that  to  the  Colossians  has  been  remarked  already.  An 
assertion  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Colossians,  viz.  that  "  Ones- 
imus was  one  of  them,"  is  verified,  not  by  any  mention 
of  Colosse,  any  the  most  distant  intimation  concerning 
the  place  of  Philemon's  abode,  but  singly  by  stating  Ones- 
imus  "to  be  Philemon's  servant,  and  by  joining  in  the  sal- 
utation Philemon  with  Archippus ;  for  this  Archippus, 
when  we  go  back  to  the  Epistle  to  the  Colossians,  ap- 
pears to  have  been  an  inhabitant  of  that  city,  and,  as  it 
should  seem,  to  have  held  an  office  of  authority  in  that 
church.  The  case  stands  thus.  Take  the  Epistle  to  the 
Colossians  alone,  and  no  circumstance  is  discoverable 
which  makes  out  the  assertion  that  Onesimus  was  "  one 
of  them."  Take  the  Epistle  to  Philemon  alone,  and  noth- 
ing at  all  appears 'concerning  the  place  to  which  Philemon 
or  his  servant  Onesimus  belonged.  For  any  thing  that 
is  said  in  the  epistle,  Philemon  might  have  been  a  Thes- 
salonian,  a  Philippian,  or  an  Ephesian,  as  well  as  a  Colos- 
sian.  Put  the  two  epistles  together,  and  the  matter  is 
clear.  The  reader  perceives  a  junction  of  circumstances, 
which  ascertains  the  conclusion  at  once.  Now,  all  that 
is  necessary  to  be  added  in  this  place  is,  that  this  corres- 
pondency evinces  the  genuineness  of  one  epistle,  as  well 

10* 


226  THE    EPISTLE    TO    PHILEMON. 

as  of  the  other.  It  is  like  comparing  the  two  parts  of  a 
cloven  tally.  Coincidence  proves  the  authenticity  of 
both. 


No.  II. 

And  this  coincidence  is  perfect :  not  only  in  the  main 
article  of  showing,  by  implication,  Onesimus  to  be  a  Co- 
lossian,  but  in  many  dependent  circumstances. 

1.  "I  beseech  thee  for  my  son  Onesimus,  whom  I  have 
sent  again,"  ver.  10 — 12.  It  appears  from  the  Epistle  to 
the  Colossians,  that,  in  truth,  Onesimus  was  sent  at  that 
time  to  Colosse :  "  All  my  state  shall  Tychicus  declare, 
whom  I  have  sent  unto  you  for  the  same  purpose,  with 
Onesimus,  a  faithful  and  beloved  brother."  Colos.  chap. 
rv.  7—9. 

2.  "  I  beseech  thee  for  my  son  Onesimus,  ivhom  I  have 
begotten  in  my  bonds,"  ver.  10.  It  appears  from  the  pre- 
ceding quotation  that  Onesimus  was  with  St.  Paul  when 
he  wrote  the  Epistle  to  the  Colossians  ;  and  that  he  wrote 
that  epistle  in  imprisonment  is  evident  "from  his  decla- 
ration in  the  fourth  chapter  and  third  verse :  "  Praying 
also  for  us,  that  God  would  open  unto  us  a  door  of  utter- 
ance, to  speak  the  mystery  of  Christ,  for  which  I  am  also 
in  bonds." 

3.  St.  Paul  bids  Philemon  prepare  for  him  a  lodging : 
"  For  I  trust,"  says  he.  "  that  through  your  prayers  I  shall 
be  given  unto  you."  This  agrees  with  the  expectation  of 
speedy  deliverance,  which  he  expressed  in  another  epis- 
tle written  during  the  same  imprisonment:  "Him"  (Tim- 
othy) "  I  hope  to  send  presently,  so  soon  as  I  shall  see 
how  it  will  go  with  me :  but  I  trust  in  the  Lord  that  I 
also  myself  shall  come  shortly."     Phil.  chap.  ii.  23,  24. 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    PHILEMON.  227 

4.  As  the  letter  to  Philemon,  and  that  to  the  Colossians, 
were  written  at  the  same  time,  and  sent  by  the  same  mes- 
senger, the  one  to  a  particular  inhabitant,  the  other  to  the 
church  of  Colosse,  it  may  be  expected  that  the  same  or 
nearly  the  same  persons  would  be  about  St.  Paul,  and 
join  with  him,  as  was  the  practice,  in  the  salutations  of 
the  epistle.  Accordingly  we  find  the  names  of  Aristar- 
chus,  Marcus,  Epaphras,  Luke,  and  Demas,  in  both  epis- 
tles. Timothy,  who  is  joined  with  St.  Paul  in  the  super- 
scription of  the  Epistle  to  the  Colossians,  is  joined  with 
him  in  this.  Tychicus  did  not  salute  Philemon,  because 
he  accompanied  the  epistle  to  Colosse,  and  would  un- 
doubtedly there  see  him.  Yet  the  reader  of  the  Epistle 
to  Philemon  will  remark  one  considerable  diversity  in  the 
catalogue  of  saluting  friends,  and  which  shows  that  the 
catalogue  was  not  copied  from  that  to  the  Colossians. 
In  the  Epistle  to  the  Colossians,  Aristarchus  is  called  by 
St.  Paul,  his  fellow-prisoner,  Colos.  chap.  iv.  10 ;  in  the 
Epistle  to  Philemon,  Aristarchus  is  mentioned  without 
any  addition,  and  the  title  of  fellow-prisoner  is  given  to 
Epaphras.* 

And  let  it  also  be  observed  that,  notwithstanding  the 
close  and  circumstantial  agreement  between  the  two  epis- 
tles, this  is  not  the  case  of  an  opening  left  in  a  genuine 
writing,  which  an  impostor  is  induced  to  fill  up ;  nor  of  a 
reference  to  some  writing  not  extant,  which  sets  a  sophist 
at  work  to  supply  the  loss,  in  like  manner  as,  because  St. 
Paul  was  supposed  (Colos.  chap.  iv.  1G)  to  allude  to  an 

*  Dr.  Benson  observes,  and  perhaps  truly,  that  the  appellation  of  fellow- 
prisoner,  as  applied  by  St.  Paul  to  Epaphras,  did  not  imply  that  they  were 
imprisoned  together  at  (lie  lime;  any  more  than  your  calling  a  person  your 
fellow-traveller  imports  that  you  arc  then  upon  your  travels.  If  he  had, 
upon  any  former  occasion,  travelled  with  you.  you  alight  afterwards  i 
of  him  under  that  title.     It  is  just  so  with  the  term  fellow-prisoner. 


228  THE    EPISTLE    TO    PHILEMON. 

epistle  written  by  him  to  the  Laodiceans,  some  person 
has  from  thence  taken  the  hint  of  uttering  a  forgery  un- 
der that  title.  The  present,  I  say,  is  not  that  case ;  for 
Philemon's  name  is  not  mentioned  in  the  Epistle  to  the 
Colossians ;  Onesimus's  servile  condition  is  nowhere 
hinted  at,  any  more  than  his  crime,  his  flight,  or  the  place 
or  time  of  his  conversion.  The  story  therefore  of  the 
epistle,  if  it  be  a  fiction,  is  a  fiction  to  which  the  author 
could  not  have  been  guided  by  any  thing  he  had  read  in 
St.  Paul's  genuine  writings. 


No.  III. 

Ver.  4,  5.  "  I  thank  my  God,  making  mention  of  thee 
always  in  my  prayers,  hearing  of  thy  love  and  faith, 
which  thou  hast  toward  the  Lord  Jesus,  and  toward  all 
saints." 

''Hearing  of  thy  love  and  faith."  This  is  the  form  of 
speech  which  St.  Paul  was  wont  to  use  towards  those 
churches  which  he  had  not  seen,  or  then  visited:  see 
Rom.  chap.  i.  8;  Ephes.  chap.  i.  15;  Colos.  chap.  i.  3, 
4.  Toward  those  churches  and  persons  with  whom  he 
was  previously  acquainted,  he  employed  a  different 
phrase;  as,  ''I  thank  my  God  always  on  your  behalf, 
1  Cor.  chap.  i.  4 ;  2  Thess.  chap.  i.  3;  or,  "upon  every 
remembrance  of  you,"  Phil.  chap.  i.  3 ;  1  Thess.  chap, 
i.  2,  3 ;  2  Tim.  chap.  i.  3;  and  never  speaks  of  hearing 
of  them.  Yet  1  think  it  must  be  concluded,  from  the  nine- 
teenth verse  of  this  epistle,  that  Philemon  had  been  con- 
verted by  St.  Paul  himself:  "  Albeit,  I  do  not  say  to  thee 
how  thou  owest  unto  me  even  thine  own  self  besides." 
Here  then  is  a  peculiarity.  Let  us  inquire  whether  the 
epistle  supplies  any  circumstance  which  will  account  for 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    PHILEMON.  229 

it.  We  have  seen  that  it  may  be  made  out,  not  from  the 
epistle  itself,  but  from  a  comparison  of  the  epistle  with 
that  to  the  Colossians,  that  Philemon  was  an  inhabitant 
of  Colosse :  and  it  farther  appears,  from  the  Epistle  to 
the  Colossians,  that  St.  Paul  had  never  been  in  that  city : 
"  I  would  that  ye  knew  what  great  conflict  I  have  for  you 
and  for  them  at  Laodicea,  and  for  as  many  as  have  not 
seen  my  face  in  the  flesh."  Col.  chap.  ii.  1.  Although, 
therefore,  St.  Paul  had  formerly  met  with  Philemon  at 
some  other  place,  and  had  been  the  immediate  instrument 
of  his  conversion,  yet  Philemon's  faith  and  conduct  after- 
wards, inasmuch  as  he  lived  in  a  city  which  St.  Paul  had 
never  visited,  could  only  be  known  to  him  by  fame  and 
reputation. 


No.  IV. 

The  tenderness  and  delicacy  of  this  epistle  have  long 
been  admired  :  "  Though  I  might  be  much  bold  in  Christ 
to  enjoin  thee  that  which  is  convenient,  yet  for  love's  sake 
i  rather  beseech  thee,  being  such  an  one  as  Paul  the  aged, 
and  now  also  a  prisoner  of  Jesus  Christ;  I  beseech  thee 
for  my  son  Onesimus,  whom  I  have  begotten  in  my 
bonds."  There  is  something  certainly  very  melting  and 
persuasive  in  this,  and  every  part  of  the  epistle.  Yet  in 
my  opinion,  the  character  of  St.  Paul  prevails  in  it 
throughout.  The  warm,  affectionate,  authoritative  teachei 
is  interceding  with  an  absent  friend  for  a  beloved  convert. 
He  urges  his  suit  with  an  earnestness  befitting  perhaps 
not  so  much  the  occasion  as  the  ardor  and  sensibility  of 
his  own  mind.  Here  also,  as  everywhere,  he  shows  him- 
self conscious  of  the  weight  and  dignity  of  his  mission; 


230  THE    EPISTLE    TO    PHILEMON. 

nor  does  he  suffer  Philemon  for  a  moment  to  forget  it :  "I 
might  be  much  bold  in  Christ  to  enjoin  thee  that  which 
is  convenient."  He  is  careful  also  to  recall,  though 
obliquely,  to  Philemon's  memory,  the  sacred  obligation 
under  which  he  had  laid  him,  by  bringing  to  him  the 
knowledge  of  Jesus  Christ:  "I  do  not  say  to  thee  how. 
thou  owest  to  me  even  thine  own  self  besides."  Without 
laying  aside,  therefore,  the  apostolic  character,  our  author 
softens  the  imperative  style  of  his  address,  by  mixing  with 
it  every  sentiment  and  consideration  that  could  move  the 
heart  of  his  correspondent.  Aged  and  in  prison,  he  is 
content  to  supplicate  and  entreat.  Onesimus  was  ren- 
dered dear  to  him  by  his  conversion,  and  his  services  ; 
the  child  of  his  affliction,  and  "  ministering  unto  him  in 
the  bonds  of  the  Gospel."  This  ought  to  recommend  him, 
whatever  had  been  his  fault,  to  Philemon's  forgiveness : 
"Receive  him  as  myself,  as  my  own  bowels."  Every  thing 
however  should  be  voluntary.  St.  Paul  was  determined 
that  Philemon's  compliance  should  flow  from  his  own 
bounty :  "  Without  thy  mind  would  I  do  nothing,  that  thy 
benefit  should  not  be  as  it  were  of  necessity,  but  willing- 
ly ;"  trusting  nevertheless  to  his  gratitude  and  attachment 
for  the  performance  of  all  that  he  requested,  and  for 
more  :  "  Having  confidence  in  thy  obedience,  I  wrote 
unto  thee,  knowing  that  thou  wilt  also  do  more  than  I 
say." 

St.  Paul's  discourse  at  Miletus ;  his  speech  before 
Agrippa ;  his  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  as  hath  been  re- 
marked (No.  VIII.) ;  that  to  the  Galatians,  chap.  iv.  11 — 
20  ;  to  the  Philippians,  chap.  i.  29,  chap.  ii.  2  ;  the  Sec- 
ond to  the  Corinthians,  chap.  vi.  1—13;  and,  indeed,  some 
part  or  other  of  almost  every  epistle,  exhibit  examples 
of  a  similar  application  to  the  feelings  and  affections  of 


THE    EPISTLE    TO    PHILEMON.  231 

the  persons  whom  he  addresses.  And  it  is  observable 
that  these  pathetic  effusions,  drawn  for  the  most  part  from 
his  own  sufferings  and  situation,  usually  precede  a  com- 
mand, soften  a  rebuke,  or  mitigate  the  harshness  of  some 
disagreeable  truth. 


CHAPTER  XV. 

THE  SUBSCRIPTIONS  OF  THE  EPISTLES. 

Six  of  these  subscriptions  are  false  or  improbable  ; 
that  is,  they  are  either  absolutely  contradicted  by  the 
contents  of  the  epistle,  or  are  difficult  to  be  reconciled 
with  them. 

I.  The  subscription  of  the  First  Epistle  to  the  Corin- 
thians states  that  it  was  written  from  Philippi,  notwith- 
standing that,  in  the  sixteenth  chapter  and  eighth  verse  of 
the  epistle,  St.  Paul  informs  the  Corinthians  that  he  will 
"tarry  at  Ephesus  until  Pentecost;"  and  notwitstanding 
that  he  begins  the  salutations  in  the  epistle  by  telling 
them  "the  churches  of  Asia  salute  you  ;"  a  pretty  evident 
indication  that  he  himself  was  in  Asia  at  this  time. 

II.  The  Epistle  to  the  Galatians  is  by  the  subscription 
dated  from  Rome  :  yet,  in  the  epistle  itself,  St.  Paul  ex- 
presses his  surprise  "  that  they  were  so  soon  removed 
from  hi  no  that  called  them  ;"  whereas  his  journey  to 
Rome  was  ten  years  posterior  to  the  conversion  of  the 
Galatians.  And  what,  I  think,  is  more  conclusive,  the 
author,  though  speaking  of  himself  in  this  more  than 
any  other  epistle,  does  not  once  mention  his  bonds,  or 
call  himself  a  prisoner  ;  which  he  had  not  failed  to  do  in 
every  one  of  the  four  epistles  written  from  that  city,  and 
during  that  imprisonment. 

III.  The  First  Epistle  to  the  Thcssalonians  was  written, 
the  subscription  tells  us,  from  Athens;  yet  the  epistle 
refers  expressly  to  the  coming  of  Timotheus  from  Thes- 


THE    SUBSCRIPTIONS    OF    TKE    EPISTLES.  233 

salonica,  chap.  iii.  6  ;  and  the  history  informs  us,  Acts, 
xviii.  5,  that  Timothy  came  out  of  Macedonia  to  St.  Paul 
at  Corinth. 

IV.  The  Second  Epistle  to  the  Thessalonians  is  dated, 
and  without  any  discoverable  reason,  from  Athens  also. 
If  it  be  truly  the  second ;  if  it  refer,  as  it  appears  to  do, 
chap.  ii.  2,  to  the  first,  and  the  first  was  written  from  Cor- 
inth, the  place  must  be  erroneously  assigned,  for  the  his- 
tory does  not  allow  us  to  suppose  that  St.  Paul,  after  he 
had  reached  Corinth,  went  back  to  Athens. 

V.  The  First  Epistle  to  Timothy  the  subscription  as- 
serts to  have  been  sent  from  Laodicea ;  yet,  when  St. 
Paul  writes,  "  I  besought  thee  to  abide  still  at  Ephesus, 
noqevoftevos  stg  Muxedoviay  (when  I  set  out  for  Macedonia)," 
the  reader  is  naturally  led  to  conclude  that  he  wrote  the 
letter  upon  his  arrival  in  that  country. 

VI.  The  Epistle  to  Titus  is  dated  from  Nicopolis  in 
Macedonia,  whilst  no  city  of  that  name  is  known  to  have 
existed  in  that  province. 

The  use,  and  the  only  use,  which  I  make  of  these  ob- 
servations, is  to  show  how  easily  errors  and  contradic- 
tions steal  in  where  the  writer  is  not  guided  by  original 
knowledge.  There  are  only  eleven  distinct  assignments 
of  date  to  St.  Paul's  Epistles  (for  the  four  written  from 
Rome  may  be  considered  as  plainly  contemporary)  ;  and, 
of  these,  six  seem  to  be  erroneous.  I  do  not  attribute  any 
.authority  to  these  subscriptions.  I  believe  them  to  have 
been  conjectures  founded  sometimes  upon  loose  traditions, 
but  more  generally  upn  a  consideration  of  some  particu- 
lar text,  without  sufficiently  comparing  it  with  other  parts 
of  the  epistle,  with  different  epistles,  or  with  the  history. 
Suppose  then  that  the  subscriptions  had  come  down  to 
us  as  authentic  parts  of  the  epistles,  there  would  have 
been  more  contrarieties  and  difficulties  arising  out  of  these 


234  THE    SUBSCRIPTIONS    OF    THE    EPISTLES. 

final  verses  than  from  all  the  rest  of  the  volume.  Yet, 
if  the  epistles  had  been  forged,  the  whole  must  have  been 
made  up  of  the  same  elements  as  those  of  which  the  sub- 
scriptions are  composed,  viz.  tradition,  conjecture,  and  in- 
ference ;  and  it  would  have  remained  to  be  accounted 
for,  how,  whilst  so  many  errors  were  crowded  into  the 
concluding  clauses  of  the  letters,  so  much  consistency 
should  be  preserved  in  other  parts. 

The  same  reflection  arises  from  observing  the  over- 
sights and  mistakes  which  learned  men  have  committed, 
when  arguing  upon  allusions  which  relate  to  time  and 
place,  or  when  endeavoring  to  digest  scattered  circum- 
stances into  a  continued  story.  It  is  indeed  the  same 
case  :  for  these  subscriptions  must  be  regarded  as  ancient 
scholia,  and  as  nothing  more.  Of  this  liability  to  error  I 
can  present  the  reader  with  a  notable  instance  ;  and 
which  I  bring  forward  for  no  other  purpose  than  that  to 
which  I  apply  the  erroneous  subscriptions.  Ludovicus 
Capellus,  in  that  part  of  his  Historia  Apostolica  Ulustrata, 
which  is  entitled  De  Ordine  Epist.  Paul,  writing  upon 
the  Second  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  triumphs  unmerci- 
fully over  the  want  of  sagacity  in  Baronius,  who,  it  seems, 
makes  St.  Paul  write  his  Epistle  to  Titus  from  Mace- 
donia upon  his  second  visit  into  that  province ;  whereas 
it  appears,  from  the  history,  that  Titus,  instead  of  being 
at  Crete,  where  the  epistle  places  him,  was  at  that  time 
sent  by  the  apostle  from  Macedonia  to  Corinth.  "  Ani- 
madvertere  est,"  says  Capellus,  "  magnam  hominis  illius 
uGUupiuv,  qui  vult  Titum  a  Paulo  in  Cretam  abductum, 
illicque  relictum,  cum  inde  ATicopolim  navigaret,  quern 
tamen  agnoscit  a  Paulo  ex  Macedonia  missum  esse  Cor- 
inthum."  This  probably  will  be  thought  a  detection  of 
inconsistency  in  Baronius.  But  what  is  the  most  remark- 
able is,  that  in  the  same  chapter  in  which  he  thus  indulges 


THE    SUBSCRIPTIONS    OF    THE    EPISTLES.  235 

his  contempt  of  Baronius's  judgment,  Capellus  himself 
falls  into  an  error  of  the  same  kind,  and  more  gross 
and  palpable  than  that  which  he  reproves.  For  he 
begins  the  chapter  by  stating  the  Second  Epistle  to  the 
Corinthians  and  the  First  Epistle  to  Timothy  to  be  nearly 
contemporary  ;  to  have  been  both  written  during  the 
apostle's  second  visit  into  Macedonia ;  and  that  a  doubt 
subsisted  concerning  the  immediate  priority  of  their 
dates :  "  Posterior  ad  eosdem  Corinthios  Epistola,  et  Prior 
ad  Timotheum  certant  de  prioritate,  et  sub  judice  lis  est ; 
utraque  autem  scripta  est  paulo  postquam  Paul  us  Epheso 
discessisset,  adeoque  <lum  Macedoniam  peragraret,  sed 
utra  tempore  prascedat,  non  liquet."  Now,  in  the  first 
place,  it  is  highly  improbable  that  the  two  epistles  should 
have  been  written  either  nearly  together,  or  during  the 
same  journey  through  Macedonia  ;  for,  in  the  Epistle  to 
the^Corinthians,  Timothy  appears  to  have  been  with  St. 
Paul  ;  in  the  epistle  addressed  to  him,  to  have  been  left 
behind  at  Ephesus,  and  not  only  left  behind,  but  directed 
to  continue  there,  till  St.  Paul  should  return  to  that  city. 
In  the  second  place,  it  is  inconceivable  that  a  question 
should  be  proposed  concerning  the  priority  of  date  of  the 
the  two  epistles ;  for,  when  St.  Paul,  in  his  epistle  to 
Timothy,  opens  his  address  to  him  by  saying,  "  As  I  be- 
sought thee  to  abide  still  at  Ephesus  when  I  went  into 
Macedonia,"  no  reader  can  doubt  but  that  he  here 
refers  to  the  last  interview  which  had  passed  between 
them ;  that  he  had  not  seen  him  since :  whereas,  if  the 
epistle  be  posterior  to  that  to  the  Corinthians,  yet  written 
upon  the  same  visit  into  Macedonia,  this  could  not  be 
true  ;  for,  as  Timothy  was  along  with  St.  Paul  when  he 
wrote  to  the  Corinthians,  he  must,  upon  this  supposition, 
have  passed  over  to  St.  Paul  in  Macedonia,  after  he  had 
been  left  by  him  at  Ephesus,  and  must  have  returned  to 


236  THE     SUBSCRIPTIONS    OF    THE    EPISTLES. 

Ephesus  again  before  the  epistle  was  written.  What 
misled  Ludovicus  Capellus  was  simply  this, — that  he  had 
entirely  overlooked  Timothy's  name  in  the  superscription 
of  the  Second  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians.  Which  over- 
sight appears  not  only  in  the  quotation  which  we  have 
given,  but  from  his  telling  us,  as  he  does,  that  Timothy 
came  from  Ephesus  to  St.  Paul  at  Corinth,  whereas,  the 
superscription  proves  that  Timothy  was  already  with 
St.  Paul  when  he  wrote  to  the  Corinthians  from  Mace 
donia. 


CHAPTER  XVI. 

THE  CONCLUSION. 

In  the  outset  of  this  inquiry,  the  reader  was  directed  to 
consider  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  and  the  thirteen  epistles 
of  St.  Paul,  as  certain  ancient  manuscripts  lately  discov- 
ered in  the  closet  of  some  celebrated  library.     We  have 
adhered  to  this  view  of  the  subject.     External  evidence  of 
every  kind  has  been  removed  out  of  sight ;  and  our  en- 
deavors have  been  employed  to  collect  the  indications  of 
truth  and  authenticity,  which  appeared  to  exist  in  the 
writings  themselves,  and  to  result  from  a  comparison  of 
their  different  parts.     It  is  not,  however,  necessary  to 
continue  this  supposition  longer.     The  testimony  which 
other  remains  of  contemporary,  or  the  monuments  of  ad- 
joining ages,  afford  to  the  reception,  notoriety,  and  public 
estimation,  of  a  b'ook,  form,  no  doubt,  the  first  proof  of  its 
genuineness.     And  in  no  books  whatever  is  this  proof 
more  complete  than  in  those  at  present  under  our  consid- 
eration.    The  inquiries  of  learned  men,  and,  above  all,  of 
the  excellent  Lardner,  who  never  overstates  a  point  of 
evidence,  and  whose  fidelity  in  citing  his  authorities  has, 
in  no  one  instance,  been  impeached,  have  established,  con- 
cerning these  writings,  the  following  propositions: 

1.  That  in  the  age  immediately  posterior  to  that  in 
which  St.  Paul  lived,  his  letters  were  publicly  read  and 
acknowledged. 

Some  of  them  are  quoted  or  alluded  to  by  almost  every 
Christian  writer  that  followed  ;  by  Clement  of  Rome,  by 


238  THE    CONCLUSION. 

Hermas,  by  Ignatius,  by  Polycarp,  disciples  or  contempo- 
raries of  the  apostles  ;  by  Justin  Martyr,  by  the  churches 
of  Gaul,  by  Irenaeus,  by  Athenagoras,  by  Theophilus,  by 
Clement  of  Alexandria,  by  Hermias,  by  Tertullian,  who 
occupied  the  succeeding  age.     Now,  when  we  find  a 
book  quoted  or  referred  to  by  an  ancient  author,  we  are 
entitled  to  conclude  that  it  was  read  and  received  in  the 
age  and  country  in  which  that  author  lived.     And  this 
conclusion  does  not,  in  any  degree,  rest  upon  the  judg- 
ment or  character  of  the  author  making  such  reference. 
Proceeding  by  this  rule,  we  have,  concerning  the  First 
Epistle  to  the  Corinthians  in  particular,  within  forty  years 
after  the  epistle  was  written,  evidence,  not  only  of  its 
being  extant  at  Corinth,  but  of  its  being  known  and  read 
at  Rome.     Clement,  bishop  of  that  city,  writing  to  the 
church  of  Corinth,  uses  these  words  :  "  Take  into  your 
hands  the  epistle  of  the  blessed  Paul  the  apostle.     What 
did  he  at  first  write  unto  you  in  the  beginning  of  the  Gos- 
pel ?     Verily  he  did  by  the  Spirit  admonish  you  concern- 
ing himself,  and  Cephas,  and  Apollos,  because  that  even 
then  you  did  form  parties."*     This  was  written  at  a  time 
when,  probably,  some  must  have  been  living  at  Corinth 
who  remembered  St.  Paul's  ministry  there,  and  the  re- 
ceipt of  the  epistle.     The  testimony  is  still  more  valuable, 
as   it   shows  that   the   epistles  were    preserved   in   the 
churches  to  which  they  were  sent,  and  that  they  were 
spread  and  propagated  from  them  to  the  rest  of  the  Chris- 
tian community.     Agreeably  to  which  natural  mode  and 
order   of  their  publication,  Tertullian,  a  century  after- 
wards, for  proof  of  the  integrity  and  genuineness  of  the 
apostolic  writings,  bids  "any  one  who  is  willing  to  exer- 
cise his  curiosity  profitably  in  the  business  of  their  salva- 
tion, to  visit  the  apostolical  churches,  in  which  their  very 

*  See  Lardner,  vol.  xii.  p.  522. 


THE    CONCLUSION. 


239 


authentic  letters  are  recited,  ipscc  authenticoe  literae  eorum 
recitantur."  Then  he  goes  on  :  "  Is  Achaia  near  you  ? 
You  have  Corinth.  If  you  are  not  far  from  Macedonia 
you  have  Philippi,  you  have  Thessalonica.  If  you  can 
go  to  Asia,  you  have  Ephesus  ;  but,  if  you  are  near  to 
Italy,  you  have  Rome."*  I  adduce  this  passage  to  show 
that  the  distinct  churches  or  Christian  societies,  to  which 
St.  Paul's  epistles  were  sent,  subsisted  for  some  agesaiter- 
wards  ;  that  his  several  epistles  were  all  along  respec- 
tively read  in  those  churches  ;  and  that  Christians  at  large 
received  them  from  those  churches,  and  appealed  to  those 
churches  for  their  originality  and  authenticity. 

Arguing  in  like  manner  from  citations  and   allusions, 
we  have,  within  the  space  of  a  hundred  and  fifty  years 
from  the  time  that  the  first  of  St.  Paul's  epistles  was  writ- 
ten, proofs  of  almost  all  of  them  being  read  in  Palestine, 
Syria,  the  countries  of  Asia  Minor,  in  Egypt,  in  that  part 
of  Africa  which  used  the  Latin  tongue,  in  Greece,  Italy 
and  Gaul.t     I  do  not  mean  simply  to  assert  that,  within 
the  space  of  a  hundred  and  fifty  years,  St.  Paul's  epistles 
were  read  in  those  countries,  for  I  believe  that  they  were 
read  and  circulated  from  the  beginning ;  but  that  proofs 
of  their  being  so  read  occur  within  that  period.     And 
when  it  is  considered  how  few  of  the  primitive  Christians 
wrote,  and  of  what  was  written,  how  much  is  lost,  we  are 
to  account  it  extraordinary,  or  rather  as  a  sure  proof  of 
the  extensiveness  of  the  reputation  of  these  writings,  and 
of  the  general  respect  in  which  they  were  held,  that  so 
many  testimonies,  and  of  such  antiquity,  are  still  extant. 
"In  the  remaining  works  of  Irenccus,  Clement  of  Alexan- 
dria, and  Tertullian,  there  are,  perhaps,  more  and  larger 
quotations  of  the  small  volume  of  the  New  Testament 

*  Sec  Lanlner,  vol.  li.  p.  598< 

■j-  See  LarJner's  Recapitulation,  vol.  xii.  p.  53. 


240  THE    CONCLUSION. 

than  of  all  the  works  of  Cicero  in  the  writings  of  all  char- 
acters for  several  ages.     We  must  add  that  the  epistles  of 
Paul  come  in  for  their  full  share  of  this  observation  ;  and 
that  all  the  thirteen  epistles,  except  that  to  Philemon, 
which  is  not  quoted  by  Irenaeus  or  Clement,  and  which 
probably  escaped  notice  merely  by  its  brevity,  are  sever- 
ally cited,  and  expressly  recognized  as  St.  Paul's,  by  each 
of  these  Christian  writers.      The   Ebionites,  an  early, 
though  inconsiderable  Christian  sect,  rejected  St.  Paul 
and  his  epistles  ;*  that  is,  they  rejected  these  epistles,  not 
because  they  were  not,  but  because  they  were,  St.  Paul's ; 
and  because,  adhering  to  the  obligation  of  the  Jewish 
law,  they  chose  to  dispute  his  doctrine  and  authority. 
Their  suffrage  as  to  the  genuineness  of  the  epistles  does 
not  contradict  that  of  other  Christians.     Marcion,  an  he- 
retical writer  in  the  former  part  of  the  second  century,  is 
said  by  Tertullian  to  have  rejected  three  of  the  epistles 
which  we  now  receive,  viz.  the  two  Epistles  to  Timothy 
and  the  Epistle  to  Titus.     It  appears  to  me  not  improba- 
ble that  Marcion  might  make  some  such  distinction  as 
this,  that  no  apostolic  epistle  was  to  be  admitted  which 
was  not  read  or  attested  by  the  church  to  which  it  was 
sent ;  for  it  is  remarkable  that,  together  with  these  epis- 
tles to  private  persons,  he  rejected  also  the  catholic  epis- 
tles.    Now  the  catholic  epistles,  and  the  epistles  to  private 
persons,  agree  in  the  circumstance  of  wanting  this  partic- 
ular species  of  attestation.     Marcion,  it  seems,  acknowl- 
edged the  Epistle  to  .Philemon,  and  is  upbraided  for  his 
inconsistency  in  doing  so  by  Tertullian,f  who  asks, "  why, 
when  he  received  a  letter  written  to  a  single  person,  he 
should  refuse  two  to  Timothy  and  one  to  Titus  composed 
upon  the  affairs  of  the  church  ?"      This  passage  so  far 
favors  our  account  of  Marcion's  objection  as  it  shows  that 

*  Lardner,  vol.  ii.  p.  808.  f  Ibid.  vol.  xiv.  p.  455. 


THE    CONCLUSION.  241 

the  objection  was  supposed  by  Tertullian  to  have  been 
founded  in  something  which  belonged  to  the  nature  of  a 
private  letter. 

Nothing  of  the  works  of  Marcion  remains.  Probably 
he  was,  after  all,  a  rash,  arbitrary,  licentious  critic,  (if  he 
deserved,  indeed,  the  name  of  critic),  and  who  offered  no 
reason  for  his  determination.  What  St.  Jerome  says  of 
him  intimates  this,  and  is  besides  founded  in  good  sense  : 
Speaking  of  him  and  Basilides, "  If  they  had  assigned  any 
reasons,"  says  he,  "  why  they  did  not  reckon  these  epis- 
tles," viz.  the  First  and  Second  to  Timothy  and  the  Epis- 
tle to  Titus, "  to  be  the  apostle's,  we  would  have  endeav- 
ored to  have  answered  them,  and  perhaps  might  have 
satisfied  the  reader :  but  when  they  take  upon  them,  by 
their  own  authority,  to  pronounce  one  epistle  to  be  St. 
Paul's  and  another  not,  they  can  only  be  replied  to  in  the 
same  manner."*  Let  it  be  remembered,  however,  that 
Marcion  received  ten  of  these  epistles.  His  authority, 
therefore,  even  if  his  credit  had  been  better  than  it  is,  forma 
a  very  small  exception  to  the  uniformity  of  the  evidence. 
Of  Basilides,  we  know  still  less  than  we  do  of  Marcion. 
The  same  observation,  however,  belongs  to  him,  viz.  that 
his  objection,  as  far  as  appears  from  this  passage  of  St. 
Jerome,  was  confined  to  the  three  private  epistles.  Yet 
is  this  the  only  opinion  which  can  be  said  to  disturb  the 
consent  of  the  first  two  centuries  of  the  Christian  era;  for, 
as  to  Tatian,  who  is  reported  by  Jerome  alone  to  have 
rejected  some  of  St.  Paul's  epistles,  the  extravagant,  or 
rather  delirious,  notions  into  which  he  fell,  take  away  all 
weight  and  credit  from  his  judgment — if,  indeed,  Jerome's 
account  of  this  circumstance  be  correct ;  for  it  appears 
from  much  older  writers  than  Jerome,  that  Tatian  owned 
and  used  many  of  these  epistles,  f 

*  Lartlner,  vol.  xiv.  p.  458.  -f  Ibid.  vol.  i.  p.  313. 

11 


242  THE    CONCLUSION. 

II.  They  who  in  those  ages  disputed  about  so  many 
other  points  agreed  in  acknowledging  the  Scriptures  now 
before  us.  Contending  sects  appealed  to  them  in  their 
controversies  with  equal  and  unreserved  submission. 
When  they  were  urged  by  one  side,  however  they  might 
be  interpreted  or  misinterpreted  by  the  other,  their  au- 
thority was  not  questioned.  "  Reliqui  omnes,"  says  Ire- 
noeus,  speaking  of  Marcion,  "  falso  scientias  nomine  in- 
flati,  scripturas  quidem  confitentur,  interpretationes  vero 
convertunt."* 

III.  When  the  genuineness  of  some  other  writings 
which  were  in  circulation,  and  even  of  a  few  which  are 
now  received  into  the  canon,  was  contested,  these  were 
never  called  into  dispute.  Whatever  was  the  objection, 
or  whether  in  truth  there  ever  was  any  real  objection,  to 
the  authenticity  of  the  Second  Epistle  of  Peter,  the  Sec- 
ond and  Third  of  John;  the  Epistle  of  James,  or  that  of 
Jude,  or  to  the  book  of  the  Revelation  of  St.  John;  the 
doubts  that  appeared  to  have  been  entertained  concern- 
ing them  exceedingly  strengthen  the  force  of  the  testi- 
mony as  to  those  writings  about  which  there  was  no 
doubt :  because  it  shows  that  the  matter  was  a  subject, 
amongst  the  early  Christians,  of  examination  and  discus- 
sion ;  and  that,  where  there  was  any  room  to  doubt,  they 
did  doubt. 

What  Eusebius  hath  left  upon  the  subject  is  directly  to 
the  purpose  of  this  observation.  Eusebius,  it  is  well 
known,  divided  the  ecclesiastical  writings  which  were  ex- 
tant in  his  time  into  three  classes:  the  uvuviio{trjtu  uncon- 
tradicted," as  he  calls  them  in  one  chapter ;  or,  "  scriptures 
universally  acknowledged,"  as  he  calls  them  in  another :  the 
•'controverted,  yet  well  known  and  approved  by  many;" 
and  "the  spurious."  What  were  the  shades  of  difler- 
*   Iren.  advers.  Haer.,  quoted  by  Lardner,  vol.  xv.  p.  '125. 


THE    CONCLUSION.  243 

ence  in  the  books  of  the  second,  or  of  those  in  the  third 
class ;  or  what  it  was  precisely  that  he  meant  by  the 
term  spurious,  it  is  not  necessary  in  this  place  to  inquire. 
It  is  sufficient  for  us  to  find  that  the  thirteen  epistles  of 
St.  Paul  are  placed  by  him  in  the  first  class,  without  any 
sort  of  hesitation  or  doubt. 

It  is  farther  also  to  be  collected  from  the  chapter  in 
which  this  distinction  is  laid  down,  that  the  method  made 
use  of  by  Eusebius,  and  by  the  Christians  of  his  time,  viz. 
the  close  of  the  third  century,  in  judging  concerning  the 
sacred  authority  of  any  books,  was  to  inquire  after  and 
consider  the  testimony  of  those  who  lived  near  the  age 
of  the  apostles.* 

IV.  That  no  ancient  writing,  which  is  attested  as  these 
epistles  are,  hath  had  its  authenticity  disproved,  or  is  in 
fact  questioned.  The  controversies  which  have  been 
moved  concerning  suspected  writings,  as  the  epistles,  for 
instance,  of  Phalaris,  or  the  eighteen  epistles  of  Cicero, 
begin  by  showing  that  this  attestation  is  wanting.  That 
being  proved,  the  question  is  thrown  back  upon  internal 
marks  of  spuriousness  or  authenticity ;  and  in  these  the 
dispute  is  occupied.  In  which  disputes  it  is  to  be  observed 
that  the  contested  writings  are  commonly  attacked  by 
arguments  drawn  from  some  opposition  which  they  be- 
tray to  "  authentic  history,"  to  "  true  epistles,"  to  the 
-  real  sentiments  or  circumstances  of  the  author  whom 
they  personate  ;"f  which  authentic  history,  which  true 
epistles,  which  real  sentiments  themselves,  are  no  other 
than  ancient  documents,  whose  early  existence  and  recep- 
tion can  be  proved,  in  the  manner  in  which  the  writings 
before  us  are  traced  up  to  the  age  of  their  reputed  author, 

*  Lardner,  vol.  viii.  p.  106. 

\  See  the  tracts  written  in  the  controversy  between  Tunstal  and  Middle- 
ton,  upon  certain  suspected  epistles  ascribed  to  Cicero. 


244  THE    CONCLUSION. 

or  to  ages  near  to  his.  A  modern  who  sits  down  to  com- 
pose the  history  of  some  ancient  period,  has  no  stronger 
evidence  to  appeal  to  for  the  most  confident  assertion,  or 
the  most  undisputed  fact,  that  he  delivers,  than  writings 
whose  genuineness  is  proved  by  the  same  medium  through 
which  we  evince  the  authenticity  of  ours.  Nor,  whilst 
he  can  have  recourse  to  such  authorities  as  these,  does  he 
apprehend  any  uncertainty  in  his  accounts,  from  the  sus- 
picion of  spuriousness  or  imposture  in  his  materials. 

V.  It  cannot  be  shown  that  any  forgeries,  properly  so 
called,*  that  is,  writings  published  under  the  name  of  the 
person  who  did  not  compose  them,  made  their  appearance 
in  the  first  century  of  the  Christian  era,  in  which  century 
these  epistles  undoubtedly  existed.  I  shall  set  d-own 
under  this  proposition  the  guarded  words  of  Lardner 
himself:  "  There  are  no  quotations  of  any  books  of  them 
(spurious  and  apocryphal  books)  in  the  apostolical  fathers, 
by  whom  I  mean  Barnabas,  Clement  of  Rome,  Hermas, 
Ignatius,  and  Polycarp,  whose  writings  reach  from  the 
year  of  our  Lord  70  to  the  year  108.  /  say  this  confi- 
dently, because  I  think  it  has  been  proved.'"  Lardner,  vol. 
xii.  p.  158. 

Nor  when  they  did  appear  were  they  much  used  by 
the  primitive  Christians.  "Irenseus  quotes  not  any  of 
these  books.  He  mentions  some  of  them,  but  he  never 
quotes  them.  The  same  may  be  said  of  Tertullian  :  he 
has  mentioned  a  book  called"  Acts  of  Paul  and  Thecla  ;" 
but  it  is  only  to  condemn  it.  Clement  of  Alexandria  and 
Origen  have  mentioned  and  quoted  several  such  books, 
but  never  as  authority,  and  sometimes  with  express  marks 
of  dislike.     Eusebius  quoted  no  such  books  in  any  of  his 

*  I  believe  that  there  is  a  great  deal  of  truth  in  Dr.  Lardner's  observa- 
tion, that  comparatively  few  of  those  hooks  which  we  call  apocryphal  were 
strictly  and  originally  forgeries.     Sec  Lardner,  vol.  xii.  p.  1G7. 


THE    CONCLUSION.  245 

works.  He  has  mentioned  them  indeed,  but  how  ?  Not 
by  way  of  approbation,  but  to  show  that  they  were  of  lit- 
tle or  no  value  ;  and  that  they  never  were  received  by  the 
sounder  part  of  Christians."  Now,  if  with  this,  which  is 
advanced  after  the  most  minute  and  diligent  examination, 
we  compare  what  the  same  cautious  writer  had  before  said 
of  our  received  Scriptures, "  that  in  the  works  of  three  only 
of  the  above-mentioned  fathers  there  are  more  and  larger 
quotations  of  the  small  volume  of  the  New  Testament 
than  of  all  the  works  of  Cicero  in  the  writers  of  all  char- 
acters for  several  ages ;"  and  if  with  the  marks  of  obscu- 
rity or  condemnation,  which  accompanied  the  mention 
of  the  several  apocryphal  Christian  writings,  when  they 
happened  to  be  mentioned  at  all,  we  contrast  what  Dr. 
Lardner's  work  completely  and  in  detail  makes  out  con- 
cerning the  writings  which  we  defend,  and  what,  having 
so  made  out,  he  thought  himself  authorized  in  his  conclu- 
sion to  assert,  that  these  books  were  not  only  received 
from  the  beginning,  but  received  with  the  greatest  re- 
spect ;  have  been  publicly  and  solemnly  read  in  the  as-, 
semblies  of  Christians  throughout  the  world,  in  every  age 
from  that  time  to  this  ;  early  translated  into  the  languages 
of  divers  countries  and  people  ;  commentaries  writ  to  ex- 
plain and  illustrate  them;  quoted  by  way  of  proof  in  all 
arguments  of  a  religious  nature  ;  recommended  to  the  pe- 
rusal of  unbelievers,  as  containing  the  authentic  account 
of  the  Christian  doctrine  ; — when  we  attend,  I  say,  to  this 
representation,  we  perceive  in  it  not  only  full  proof  of  the 
early  notoriety  of  these  books,  but  a  clear  and  sensible 
line  of  discrimination,  which  separates  these  from  the  pre- 
tensions of  any  others. 

The  epistles  of  St.  Paul  stand  particularly  free  of  any 
doubt  or  confusion  that  might  arise  from  this  source. 
Until  the  conclusion  of  the  fourth  century,  no  intimation 


246  THE    CONCLUSION. 

appears  of  any  attempt  whatever  being  made  to  counter- 
feit these  writings  ;  and  then  it  appears  only  of  a  single 
and  obscure  instance.  Jerome,  who  flourished  in  the 
year  392,  has  this  expression :  "  Legunt  quidam  et  ad 
Laodicenses  ;  sed  ab  omnibus  exploditur  ;"  there  is  also 
an  epistle  to  the  Laodiceans,  but  it  is  rejected  by  every- 
body.* Theodoret,  who  wrote  in  the  year  423,  speaks 
of  this  epistle  in  the  same  terms,  f  Besides  these,  I  know 
not  whether  any  ancient  writer  mentions  it.  It  was  cer- 
tainly unnoticed  during  the  first  three  centuries  of  the 
church ;  and,  when  it  came  afterwards  to  be  mentioned, 
it  was  mentioned  only  to  show  that,  though  such  a  writing 
did  exist,  it  obtained  no  credit.  It  is  probable  that  the 
forgery  to  which  Jerome  alludes  is  the  epistle  which  we 
now  have  under  that  title.  If  so,  as  hath  been  already 
observed,  it  is  nothing  more  than  a  collection  of  sentences 
from  the  genuine  epistles  ;  and  was,  perhaps,  at  first, 
rather  the  exercise  of  some  idle  pen,  than  any  serious 
attempt  to  impose  a  forgery  upon  the  public.  Of  an 
Epistle  to  the  Corinthians  under  St.  Paul's  name,  which 
was  brought  into  Europe  in  the  present  century,  antiquity 
is  entirely  silent.  It  was  unheard  of  for  sixteen  centu- 
ries ;  and  at  this  day,  though  it  be  extant,  and  was  first 
found  in  the  Armenian  language,  it  is  not,  by  the  Chris- 
tians of  that  country,  received  into  their  Scriptures.  I 
hope,  after  this,  that  there  is  no  reader  who  will  think 
there  is  any  competition  of  credit,  or  of  external  proof, 
between  these  and  the  received  epistles  ;  or,  rather,  who 
will  not  acknowledge  the  evidence  of  authenticity  to  be 
confirmed  by  the  want  of  success  which  attended  im- 
posture. 

When  we  take  into  our  hands  the  letters  which  the 
suffrage  and  consent  of  antiquity  hath  thus  transmitted  to 

*  Lardner,  vol.  x.  p.  103.  -f  Ibid.  vol.  xi.  p.  88. 


THE    CONCLUSION.  247 

us,  the  first  thing  that  strikes  our  attention  is  the  air  of 
reality  and  business,  as  well  as  of  seriousness  and  convic- 
tion, which  pervades  the  whole.  Let  the  sceptic  read 
them.  If  he  be  not  sensible  of  these  qualities  in  them, 
the  argument  can  have  no  weight  with  him.  If  he 
be  ;  if  he  perceive  in  almost  every  page  the  language  of 
a  mind  actuated  by  real  occasions,  and  operating  upon 
real  circumstances,  I  would  wish  it  to  be  observed,  that 
the  proof  which  arises  from  this  perception  is  not  to  be 
deemed  occult  or  imaginary,  because  it  is  incapable  of 
being  drawn  out  in  words,  or  of  being  conveyed  to  the 
apprehension  of  the  reader  in  any  other  way  than  by 
sending  him  to  the  books  themselves. 

And  here,  in  its  proper  place,  comes  in  the  argument 
which  it  has  been  the  office  of  these  pages  to  unfold. 
St.  Paul's  epistles  are  connected  with  the  history  by  their 
particularity,  and  by  the  numerous  circumstances  which 
are  found  in  them.  When  we  descend  to  an  examination 
and  comparison  of  these  circumstances,  we  not  only  ob- 
serve the  history  and  the  epistles  to  be  independent  doc- 
uments unknown  to,  or  at  least  unconsulted  by,  each 
other,  but  we  find  the  substance,  and  oftentimes  very 
minute  articles,  of  the  history,  recognized  in  the  epistles, 
by  allusions  and  references  which  can  neither  be  impu- 
ted to  design,  nor,  without  a  foundation  in  truth,  be  ac- 
counted for  by  accident ;  by  hints  and  expressions,  and 
single  words  dropping  as  it  were  fortuitously  from  the 
pen  of  the  writer,  or  drawn  forth,  each  by  some  occa- 
sion proper  to  the  place  in  which  it  occurs,  but  widely 
removed  from  any  view  to  consistency  or  agreement. 
These,  we  know,  are  effects  which  reality  naturally  pro- 
duces, but  which,  without  reality  at  the  bottom,  can 
hardly  be  conceived  to  exist. 

When,  therefore,  with  a  body  of  external  evidence, 


248  THE    CONCLUSION. 

which  is  relied  upon,  and  which  experience  proves  mav 
safely  be  relied  upon,  in  appreciating  the  credit  of  ancient 
writings,  we  combine  characters  of  genuineness  and  orig- 
inality which  are  not  found,  and  which,  in  the  nature  and 
order  of  things  cannot  be  expected  to  be  found  in  spuri- 
ous compositions  ;  whatever  difficulties  we  may  meet 
with  in  other  topics  of  the  Christian  evidence,  we  can 
have  little  in  yielding  our  assent  to  the  following  conclu- 
sions :  That  there  was  such  a  person  as  St.  Paul ;  that 
he  lived  in  the  age  which  we  ascribe  to  him  ;  that  he 
went  about  preaching  the  religion  of  which  Jesus  Christ 
was  the  founder :  and  that  the  letters  which  we  now 
read  were  actually  written  by  him  upon  the  subject,  and 
in  the  course  of  that  his  ministry. 

And,  if  it  be  true  that  we  are  in  possession  of  the  very 
letters  which  St.  Paul  wrote,  let  us  consider  what  confir- 
mation they  afford  to  the  Christian  history.  In  my  opin- 
ion they  substantiate  the  whole  transaction.  The  great 
object  of  modern  research  is  to  come  at  the  epistolary  cor- 
respondence of  the  times.  Amidst  the  obscurities,  the 
silence,  or  the  contradictions  of  history,  if  a  letter  can  be 
found,  we  regard  it  as  the  discovery  of  a  landmark ;  as 
that  by  which  we  can  correct,  adjust,  or  supply,  the  im- 
perfections and  uncertainties  of  other  accounts.  One 
cause  of  the  superior  credit  which  is  attributed  to  letters 
is  this,  that  the  facts  which  they  disclose  generally  come 
out  incidentally,  and  therefore  without  design  to  mislead 
the  public  by  false  or  exaggerated  accounts.  This  rea- 
son may  be  applied  to  St.  Paul's  epistles  with  as  much 
justice  as  to  any  letters  whatever.  Nothing  could  be  far- 
ther from  the  intention  of  the  writer  than  to  record  any 
part  of  his  history.  That  his  history  was  in  fact  made 
public  by  these  letters,  and  has,  by  the  same  means  been 
transmitted  to  future  ages,  is  a  secondary  and  unthought 


THE    CONCLUSION.  249 

of  effect.  The  sincerity,  therefore,  of  the  apostle's  decla- 
rations cannot  reasonably  be  disputed  ;  at  least  we  are 
sure  that  it  was  not  vitiated  by  any  desire  of  setting  him- 
self off  to  the  pubHc  at  large.  But  these  letters  form  a 
part  of  the  muniments  of  Christianity,  as  much  to  be  val- 
ued for  their  contents  as  for  their  originality.  A  more 
inestimable  treasure  the  care  of  antiquity  could  not  have 
sent  down  to  us.  Besides  the  proof  they  afford  of  the 
general  reality  of  St.  Paul's  history,  of  the  knowledge 
which  the  author  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  had  obtained 
of  that  history,  and  the  consequent  probability  that  he 
was,  what  he  professes  himself  to  have  been,  a  compan- 
ion of  the  apostle's  ;  besides  the  support  they  lend  to  these 
important  inferences,  they  meet  specifically  some  of  the 
principal  objections  upon  which  the  adversaries  of  Chris- 
tianity have  thought  proper  to  rely.  In  particular  they 
show, — 

I.  That  Christianity  was  not  a  story  set  on  foot  amidst 
the  confusions  which  attended  and  immeditately  preceded 
the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  ;  when  many  extravagant 
reports  were  circulated,  when  men's  minds  were  broken 
by  terror  and  distress,  when  amidst  the  tumults  that  sur- 
rounded them  inquiry  was  impracticable.  These  letters 
show  incontestably,  that  the  religion  had  fixed  and  estab- 
lished itself  before  this  state  of  things  took  place. 

II.  Whereas  it  hath  been  insinuated  that  our  Gospels 
may  have  been  made  up  of  reports  and  stories  which 
were  current  at  the  time,  we  may  observe  that  with  re- 
spect to  the  Epistles,  this  is  impossible.  A  man  cannot 
write  the  history  of  his  own  life  from  reports  :  nor,  what  is 
the  same  thing,  be  led  by  reports  to  refer  to  passages  and 
transactions  in  w:hich  he  states  himself  to  have  been  im- 
mediately present  and  active.  I  do  not  allow  that  this 
insinuation  is  applied  to  the  historical  part  of  the  ]\'ew 

w 


250  THE    CONCLUSION. 

Testament  with  any  color  of  justice  or  probability  ;  but  I 
say  that  to  the  Epistles  it  is  not  applicable  at  all. 

III.  These  letters  prove  that  the  converts  to  Christian- 
ity were  not  drawn  from  the  barbarous,  the  mean,  or  the 
ignorant  set  of  men  which  the  representations  of  infidelity 
would  sometimes  make  them.  We  learn  from  letters  the 
character  not  only  of  the  writer,  but,  in  some  measure, 
of  the  persons  to  whom  they  are  written.  To  suppose 
that  these  letters  were  addressed  to  a  rude  tribe,  incapa- 
ble of  thought  or  reflection,  is  just  as  reasonable  as  to 
suppose  Locke's  Essay  on  the  Human  understanding, to 
have  been  written  for  the  instruction  of  savages.  What- 
ever may  be  thought  of  these  letters  in  other  respects, 
either  of  diction  or  argument,  they  are  certainly  removed 
as  far  as  possible  from  the  habits  and  comprehension  of 
a  barbarous  people. 

IV.  St.  Paul's  history,  I  mean  so  much  of  it  as  may  be 
collected  from  his  letters,  is  so  implicated  with,  that  of  the 
other  apostles,  and  with  the  substance  indeed  of  the  Chris- 
tian history  itself,  that  I  apprehend  it  will  be  found  im- 
possible to  admit  St.  Paul's  story  (I  do  not  speak  of  the 
miraculous  part  of  it)  to  be  true,  and  yet  to  reject  the  rest 
as  fabulous.  For  instance,  can  anyone  believe  that  there 
was  such  a  man  as  Paul,  a  preacher  of  Christianity,  in  the 
age  which  we  assign  to  him,  and  not  believe  that  there 
was  also  at  the  same  time  such  a  man  as  Peter  and 
James,  and  other  apostles,  who  had  been  companions  of 
Christ  during  his  life,  and  who  after  his  death  published 
and  avowed  the  same  things  concerning  him  which  Paul 
taught?  Judea,  and  especially  Jerusalem,  was  the  scene 
of  Christ's  ministry.  The  witnesses  of  his  miracles  lived 
there.  St.  Paul,  by  his  own  account,  as  well  as  that  of 
his  historian,  appears  to  have  frequently  visited  that  city  ; 
to  have  carried  on  a  communication  with  the   church 


THE    CONCLUSION.  251 

there ;  to  have  associated  with  the  rulers  and  elders  of 
that  church,  who  were  some  of  them  apostles ;  to  have 
acted  as  occasions  offered,  in  correspondence,  and  some- 
times in  conjunction,  with  them.  Can  it,  after  this,  be 
doubted  but  that  the  religion  and  the  general  facts  relat- 
ing to  it  which  St.  Paul  appears  by  his  letters  to  have 
delivered  to  the  several  churches  which  he  established  at 
a  distance,  were  at  the  same  time  taught  and  published  at 
Jerusalem  itself,  the  place  where  the  business  was  trans- 
acted ;  and  taught  and  published  by  those  who  had  at- 
tended the  Founder  of  the  institution  in  his  miraoulous, 
or  pretendedly  miraculous  ministry  ? 

It  is  observable,  for  so  it  appears  both  in  the  Epistles 
and  from  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  that  Jerusalem,  and 
the  society  of  believers  in  that  city,  long  continued  the 
centre  from  which  the  missionaries  of  the  religion  issued, 
with  which  all  other  churches  maintained  a  correspond- 
ence and  connection,. to  which  they  referred  their  doubts, 
and  to  whose  relief,  in  times  of  public  distress,  they  remit- 
ted their  charitable  assistance.  This  observation  I  think 
material,  because  it  proves  that  this  was  not  the  case  of 
giving  our  accounts  in  one  country  of  what  is  transacted 
in  another,  without  affording  the  hearers  an  opportunity 
of  knowing  whether  the  things  related  were  credited  by 
any,  or  even  published,  in  the  place  where  they  are  re- 
ported to  have  passed. 

V.  St.  Paul's  leiters  furnish  evidence  (and  what  better 
evidence  than  a  man's  own  letters  can  be  desired  ?)  of 
the  soundness  and  sobriety  of  his  judgment.  His  caution 
in  distinguishing  between  the  occasional  suggestions  of  in- 
spiration, and  the  ordinary  exercise  of  his  natural  under- 
standing, is  without  example  in  the  history  of  human 
enthusiasm.  His  morality  is  everywhere  calm,  pure  and 
rational ;  adapted  to  the  condition,  the  activity,  and  the 


252  THE    C01VCLUSI0N. 

business  of  social  life,  and  of  its  various  relations  ;  free 
from  the  over-scrupulousness  and  austerities  of  supersti- 
tion, and  from,  what  was  more  perhaps  to  be  apprehended, 
the  abstractions  of  quietism,  and  the  soarings  and  extrav- 
agances of  fanaticism.  His.  judgment  concerning  a  hesi- 
tating conscience ;  his  opinion  of  the  moral  indifferency 
of  many  actions,  yet  of  the  prudence  and  even  the  duty 
of  compliance,  where  non-compliance  would  produce  evil 
effects  upon  the  minds  of  the  persons  who  observed  it,  is 
as  correct  and  just  as  the  most  liberal  and  enlightened 
moralist  could  form  at  this  day.  The  accuracy  of  mod- 
ern ethics  has  found  nothing  to  amend  in  these  determi- 
nations. 

What  Lord  Lyttelton  has  remarked  of  the  preference 
ascribed  by  St.  Paul  to  inward  rectitude  of  principle 
above  every  other  religious  accomplishment  is  very  ma- 
terial to  our  present  purpose.  "  In  his  First  Epistle  to 
the  Corinthians,  chap.  xiii.  1 — 3.  St.  Paul  has  these  words: 
Though  I  speak  with  the-  tongues  of  men  and  of  angels, 
and  have  not  charity,  I  am  become  as  sounding  brass, 
or  a  tinkling  cymbal.  And  though  I  have  the  gift  of 
■prophecy,  and  understand  all  mysteries,  and  all  knowledge ; 
and  though  I  have  all  faith,  so  that  I  could  remove  moun- 
tains, and  have  not  charity,  I  am  nothing.  And  though 
I  bestow  all  my  goods  to  feed  the  poor,  and  though  I  give 
my  body  to  be  burned,  and  have  not  charity,  it  profiteth 
me  nothing.  Is  this  the  language  of  enthusiasm  ?  Did 
ever  enthusiast  prefer  that  universal  benevolence  which 
comprehendeth  all  moral  virtues,  and  which,  as  appeareth 
by  the  following  verses,  is  meant  by  charity  here?  did 
ever  enthusiast,  I  say,  prefer  that  benevolence  ?  (which 
we  may  add  is  attainable  by  every  man)  "  to  faith  and  to 
miracles,  to  those  religious  opinions  which  he  had  em- 
braced, and  to  those  supernatural  graces  and  gifts  which 


THE    CONCLUSION.  253 

he  imagined  he  had  acquired  ;  nay,  even  to  the  merit  of 
martyrdom  ?  Is  it  not  the  genius  of  enthusiasm  to  set 
moral  virtues  infinitely  below  the  merit  of  faith  ;  and,  of 
all  moral  virtues,  to  value  that  least  which  is  most  par- 
ticularly enforced  by  St.  Paul,  a  spirit  of  candor,  modera- 
tion, and  peace  ?  Certainly  neither  the  temper  nor  the 
opinions  of  a  man  subject  to  fanatic  delusions  are  to  be 
found  in  this  passage."  Lord  Ly Helton's  Considerations 
on  the  Conversion.  <§-c. 

I  see  no  reason  therefore  to  question  the  integrity  of 
his  understanding.  To  call  him  a  visionary  because  he 
appealed  to  visions,  or  an  enthusiast  because  he  pretended 
to  inspiration,  is  to  take  the  whole  question  for  granted. 
It  is  to  take  for  granted  that  no  such  visions  or  inspira- 
tions existed  ;  at  least  it  is  to  assume,  contrary  to  his  own 
assertions,  that  he  had  no  other  proofs  than  these  to  offer 
of  his  mission,  or  of  the  truth  of  his  relations. 

One  thing  I  allow,  that  his  letters  everywhere  discover 
great  zeal  and  earnestness  in  the  cause  in  which  he  was 
engaged ;  that  is  to  say,  he  was  convinced  of  the  truth 
of  what  he  taught ;  he  was  deeply  impressed,  but  not 
more  so  than  the  occasion  merited,  with  a  sense  of  its 
importance.  This  produces  a  corresponding  animation 
and  solicitude  in  the  exercise  of  his  ministry.  But 
would  not  these  considerations,  supposing  them  to  be 
well  founded,  have  holden  the  same  place  and  produced 
the  same  effect,  in  a  mind  the  strongest  and  the  most 
sedate  ? 

VI.  These  letters  are  decisive  as  to  the  sufferings  of 
the  author  ;  also  as  to  the  distressed  state  of  the  Christian 
church,  and  the  dangers  which  attended  the  preaching  of 
the  Gospel. 

';  Whereof  I  Paul  am  made  a  minister ;  who  now  re- 
joice in   my  sufferings  for  you.  and  II 1 1  up  that  which  is 


254  THE    CONCLUSION. 

behind  of  the  afflictions  of  Christ  in  my  flesh,  for  his  body's 
sake,  which  is  the  church."     Col.  chap.  i.  24. 

"  If  in  this  life  only  we  have  hope  in  Christ,  we  are  of 
all  men  most  miserable."'     1  Cor.  chap.  xv.  19. 

"  Why  stand  we  in  Jeopardy  every  hour  ?  I  protest 
by  your  rejoicing,  which  I  have  in  Christ  Jesus  our 
Lord,  I  die  daily.  If,  after  the  manner  of  men,  I  have 
fought  with  beasts  at  Ephesus,  what  advantageth  it  me, 
if  the  dead  rise  not  ?"     1  Cor.  chap.  xv.  30,  &c. 

"  If  children,  then  heirs  ;  heirs  of  God,  and  joint  heirs 
with  Christ ;  if  so  be  that  we  suffer  with  him,  that  we 
may  be  also  glorified  together.  For  I  reckon  that  the 
sufferings  of  this  present  time  are  not  worthy  to  be  com- 
pared with  the  glory  which  shall  be  revealed  in  us." 
Rom.  chap.  viii.  17,  18. 

"  Who  shall  separate  us  from  the  love  of  Christ  ?  shall 
tribulation,  or  distress,  or  persecution,  or  famine,  or 
nakedness,  or  peril,  or  sword  ?  As  it  is  written,  For 
thy  sake  we  are  killed  all  the  day  long,  we  are  accounted 
as  sheep  for  the  slaughter.     Rom.  chap.  viii.  35,  36. 

"  Rejoicing  in  hope,  patient  in  tribulation,  continuing 
instant  in  prayer."     Rom.  chap.  vii.  12. 

"Now  concerning  virgins  I  have  no  commandment 
of  the  Lord  ;  yet  I  give  my  judgment  as  one  that  hath 
obtained  mercy  of  the  Lord  to  be  faithful.  I  suppose 
therefore  that  this  is  good  for  the  present  distress  ;  I  say 
that  it  is  good  for  a  nian  so  to  be."  1  Cor.  chap.  vii. 
25,  20. 

"  For  unto  you  it  is  given,  in  the  behalf  of  Christ, 
not  only  to  believe  on  him,  but  also  to  suffer  for  his  sake, 
having  the  same  conflict  which  ye  saw  in  me,  and  now 
hear  to  be  in  me."     Phil.  chap.  i.  29,  30. 

"  God  forbid  that  I  should  glory,  save  in  the  cross  of 


THE    CONCLUSION.  255 

our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  by  whom  the  world  is  crucified 
unto  me,  and  I  unto  the  world." 

"  From  henceforth  let  no  man  trouble  me,  for  I  bear  in 
my  body  the  marks  of  the  Lord  Jesus."  Gal.  chap.  vi. 
14,  17. 

"  Ye  became  followers  of  us,  and  of  the  Lord,  having 
received  the  word  in  much  affliction,  with  joy  of  the  Holy 
Ghost."     1  Thess.  chap.  i.  6. 

We  ourselves  glory  in  you  in  the  churches  of  God,  foi 
your  patience  and  faith  in  all  your  persecutions  and  trib- 
ulations that  ye  endure."     2  Thess.  chap.  i.  4. 

We  may  seem  to  have  accumulated  texts  unnecessarily ; 
but,  besides  that  the  point  which  they  are  brought  to  prove 
is  of  great  importance,  there  is  this  also  to  be  remarked 
in  every  one  of  the  passages  cited,  that  the  allusion  is 
drawn  from  the  writer  by  the  argument  or  the  occasion : 
that  the  notice  which  is  taken  of  his  sufferings,  and  of  the 
suffering  condition  of  Christianity,  is  perfectly  incidental, 
and  is  dictated  by  no  design  of  stating  the  facts  themselves. 
Indeed  they  are  not  stated  at  all ;  they  may  rather  be  said 
to  be  assumed.  This  is  a  distinction  upon  which  we  have 
relied  a  good  deal  in  former  parts  of  this  treatise  ?  and, 
where  the  writer's  information  cannot  be  doubted,  it  always 
in  my  opinion,  adds  greatly  to  the  value  and  credit  of 
the  testimony. 

If  any  reader  require  from  the  apostle  more  direct  and 
explicit  assertions  of  the  same  thing,  he  will  receive  full 
satisfaction  in  the  following  quotations. 

"  Are  they  ministers  of  Christ  ?  (I  speak  as  a  fool)  I 
am  more ;  in  labors  more  abundant,  in  stripes  above 
measure,  in  prisons  more  frequent,  in  deaths  oft.  Of  the 
Jews  five  times  received  I  forty  stripes  save  one.  Thrice 
was  I  beaten  with  rods,  once  was  I  stoned  ;  thrice  I 
suffered  shipwreck,  a  ni'.rht  and  a  day  I  have  been  in  the 


25G  THE    CONCLUSION. 

deep  ;  in  journeyings  often,  in  perils  of  waters,  in  perils  of 
robbers,  in  perils  by  mine  own  countrymen,  in  perils  by 
the  heathen,  in  perils  in  the  city,  in  perils  in  the  wilderness, 
in  perils  in  the  sea,  in  perils  among  false  brethren ;  in 
weariness  and  painfulness,  in  watchings  often,  in  hun- 
ger and  thirst,  in  fastings  often,  in  cold  and  nakedness.'* 
2  Cor.  chap.  xi.  23—28. 

Can  it  be  necessary  to  add  more ?  "I  think  that  God 
hath  set  forth  us  the  apostles  last,  as  it  were  appointed  to 
death ;  for  we  are  made  a  spectacle  unto  the  world,  and 
to  angels,  and  to  men.  Even  unto  this  present  hour  we 
both  hunger  and  thirst,  and  are  naked,  and  are  buffeted, 
and  have  no  certain  dwelling-place  ;  and  labor,  working 
with  our  own  hands :  being  reviled,  we  bless ;  being 
persecuted,  we  suffer  it ;  being  defamed,  we  entreat :  we 
are  made  as  the  filth  of  the  earth,  and  are  the  offscouring 
of  all  things  unto  this  day."  1  Cor.  chap.  iv.  9 — 13.  I 
subjoin  this  passage  to  the  former,  because  it  extends  to 
the  other  apostles  of  Christianity  much  of  that  which  St. 
Paul  declared  concerning  himself. 

In  the  following  quotations,  the  reference  to  the  au- 
thor's sufferings  is  accompanied  with  a  specification  of 
time  and  place,  and  with  an  appeal  for  the  truth  of  what 
he  declares  to  the  knowledge  of  the  persons  whom  he 
addresses:  "Even  after  that  we  had  suffered  before,  and 
were  shamefully  entreated,  as  ye  know,  at  Philippi,  we 
were  bold  in  our  God  to  speak  unto  you  the  Gospel  of 
God  with  much  contention."     1  Thess.  chap.  ii.  2. 

"  But  thou  hast  fully  known  my  doctrine,  manner  of 
life,  purpose,  faith,  long-suffering,  persecutions,  afflictions, 
which  came  unto  me  at  Antioch,  at  Iconium,  at  Lyslra  ; 
what  persecutions  I  endured :  but  out  of  them  all  the 
Lord  delivered  me."     2  Tim.  chap.  iii.  10,  11. 

I  apprehend  that  to  this  point,  as  far  as  the  testimony 


THE    CONCLLVloV- 


257 


of  St.  Paul  is  credited,  the  evidence  from  his  letters  is 
complete  and  full.  It  appears  under  every  form  in  which 
it  could  appear,  by  occasional  allusions  and  by  direct  as- 
sertions, by  general  declarations  and  by  specific  exam- 
ples. 

VII.  St.  Paul  in  these  letters  asserts,  in  positive  and 
unequivocal  terms,  his  performance  of  miracles  strictly 
and  properly  so  called. 

"  He  therefore  that  ministereth  to  you  the  Spirit,  and 
worketh  miracles  (eveQywv  dwaftsig)  among  you,  doth  he 
it  by  the  works  of  the  law,  or  by  the  hearing  of  faith  ?" 
Gal.  chap.  iii.  5. 

"  For  I  will  not  dare  to  speak  of  any  of  those  things 
which  Christ  hath  not  wrought  by  me,*  to  make  the  CI  en- 
tiles obedient,  by  word  and  deed,  through  mighty  signs 
and  wonders  (e*  dwuust  otiueiwv  xui  leQUTur),  by  the  power 
of  the  Spirit  of  God :  so  that  from  Jerusalem,  and  round 
about  unto  Illyricum,  I  have  fully  preached  the  Gospel 
of  Christ."     Rom.  chap.  xv.  18,  19. 

"  Truly  the  signs  of  an  apostle  were  wrought  among 
you  in  all  patience,  in  signs  and  wonders,  and  mighty 
deeds,"  (^  oij/neiot;  xui  jsguai  xut  dvruutat).-\  2  Cor.  chap, 
xii.  12. 

*  i.  c.  "  I  will  speak  of  nothing  but  what  Christ  hath  wrought  by  me;" 
nr,  as  Grotius  interprets  it,  "  Christ  hath  wrought  so  great  things  by  me, 
that  I  will  not  dare  to  say  what  he  hath  not  wrought." 

t  To  these  may  be  added  the 'following  indirect  allusions,  which,  though 

if  they  had  stood  alone,  i.  c  without  plainer  texts  in  the  same  writings, 

the;  mighl  have  been  accounted  dubious;  yet,  when  considered  in  conjunc- 

tion  w'uli  the  passages  already  cited,  can  hardly  receive  any  other  interpre- 

..ii  than  that  which  we  give  them. 

••  My  speech  and  my  preaching  was  not  with  enticing  words  of  man  ■ 
wisdom,  but  in  demonstration  of  the  Spirit,  and  of  power:  that  your  faith 
should  not  stand  in  the  wisdom  of  men,  but  in  the  power  of  God."     1  Cor. 

chaps  ii.  1 — 6. 

"  The  Gospel,  whereof  I  was  made  a  minister,  according  to  the  gift  of  the 


258  THE    CONCLUSION. 

These  words,  signs,  wonders,  and  mighty  deeds,  (ar^usta, 
xat  t£?octot,  y.ui  dwapeig,)  are  the  specific  appropriate  terms 
throughout  the  New  Testament,  employed  when  public 
sensible  miracles  are  intended  to  be  expressed.  This  will 
appear  by  consulting,  amongst  other  places,  the  texts 
referred  to  in  the  note  ;*  and  it  cannot  be  known  that 
they  are  ever  employed  to  express  any  thing  else. 

Secondly,  these  words  not  only  denote  miracles  as 
opposed  to  natural  effects,  but  they  denote  visible,  and 
what  may  be  called  external,  miracles,  as  distinguished, 

First,  from  inspiration.  If  St.  Paul  had  meant  to  re- 
fer only  to  secret  illuminations  of  his  understanding,  or 
secret  influences  upon  his  will  or  affections,  he  could  not, 
with  truth,  have  represented  them  as  "  signs  and  wonders 
wrought  by  him,"  or  '-'signs,  and  wonders,  and  mighty 
deeds,  wrought  amongst  them." 

Secondly,  from  visions.  These  would  not,  by  any 
means,  satisfy  the  force  of  the  terms,  "  signs,  wonders, 
and  mighty  deeds ;"  still  less  could  they  be  said  to  be 
"  wrought  by  him,"  or  "  wrought  amongst  them  :"  nor  are 
these  terms  and  expressions  any  where  applied  to  visions. 
When  our  author  alludes  to  the  supernatural  communica- 
tions which  he  had  received,  either  by  vision  or  other- 
wise, he  uses  expressions  suited  to  the  nature  of  the  sub- 
ject, but  very  different  from  the  words  which  we  have 
quoted.    He  calls  them  revelations,  but  never  signs,  won- 

grace  of  God  given  unto  me  by  the  effectual  working  of  his  power."  Ephes. 
chap.  iii.  7. 

•■  Pot  ho  (hat  wrought  effectually  in  Peter  to  the  apostlcship  of  the  cir- 
cumcision, the  same  was  mighty  in  me  towards  the  Gentiles."  Gal.  chap, 
ii.  8. 

"  For  our  Gospel  came  not  unto  you  in  word  only,  but  also  in  power,  and 
in  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  in  much  assurance."     1  Thess.  chap.  i.  5. 

*  Mark,  xvi.  20.  Luke,  xxiii.  8.  John,  ii.  11,  23;  iii.  2;  iv.  48,  51;  xl 
4-9.     Acts,  ii.  22;  iv.  3;  v.  12;  vi.  8;  vii.  1G;  xiv.  3;  xv.  12.     Heb.  ii.  4. 


THE    CONCLUSION.  .  259 

tiers,  or  mighty  deeds.  "  I  will  come,"  says  he,  to  "  vis- 
ions and  revelations  of  the  Lord  ;"  and  then  proceeds  to 
describe  a  particular  instance,  and  afterwards  adds,  "lest 
I  should  be  exalted  above  measure  through  the  abundance 
of  the"  revelations,  there  was  given  me  a  thorn  in  the 
flesh." 

Upon  the  whole,  the  matter  admits  of  no  softening  quali- 
fication or  ambiguity  whatever.  If  St.  Paul  did  not  work 
actual,  sensible,  public  miracles,  he  has  knowingly,  in 
these  letters,  borne  his  testimony  to  a  falsehood.  I  need 
not  add  that,  in  two  also  of  the  quotations,  he  has  advanced 
his  assertion  in  the  face  of  those  persons  amongst  whom 
he  declares  the  miracles  to  have  been  wrought. 

Let  it  be  remembered  that  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles 
describe  various  particular  miracles  wrought  by  St.  Paul, 
which  in  their  nature  answer  to  the  terms  and  expressions 
which  we  have  seen  to  be  used  by  St.  Paul  himself. 


Here  then  we  have  a  man  of  liberal  attainments,  and 
in  other  points  of  sound  judgment,  who  had  addicted  his 
life  to  the  service  of  the  Gospel.  We  see  him,  in  the 
prosecution  of  his  purpose,  travelling  from  country  to 
country,  enduring  every  species  of  hardship,  encounter- 
ing every  extremity  of  danger,  assaulted  by  the  popu- 
lace, punished  by  the  magistrates,  scourged,  beat,  stoned, 
left  for  dead ;  expecting,  wherever  he  came,  a  renewal  of 
the  same  treatment,  and  the  same  dangers ;  yet.  when 
driven  from  one  city,  preaching  in  the  next ;  spending  his 
whole  time  in  the  employment,  sacrificing  to  it  his  pleas- 
ures, his  ease,  his  safety ;  persisting  in  this  course  to  old 
age,  unaltered  by  the  experience  of  perverseness,  ingrat- 
itude, prejudice,  desertion  :  unsubdued  by  anxiety,  want, 
labor,  persecutions  :  unwearied  by  long  confinement,  un- 
dismayed by  the  prospect  of  death.     Such  was  St.  Paul. 


260  o  THE    CONCLUSION. 

We  have  his  letters  in  our  hands ;  we  have  also  a  history 
purporting  to  be  written  by  one  of  his  fellow-travellers, 
and  appearing,  by  a  comparison  with  these  letters,  cer- 
tainly to  have  been  written  by  some  person  well  ac- 
quainted with  the  transactions  of  his  life.  From  the 
letters,  as  well  as  from  the  history,  we  gather  not  only 
the  account  which  we  have  stated  of  him,  but  that  he 
was  one  out  of  many  who  acted  and  suffered  in  the  same 
manner;  and  that,  of  those  who  did  so,  several  had  been 
the  companions  of  Christ's  ministry,  the  ocular  witnesses, 
or  pretending  to  be  such,  of  his  miracles,  and  of  his  res- 
urrection. We  moreover  find  this  same  person  referring 
in  his  letters  to  his  supernatural  conversion,  the  particu- 
lars and  accompanying  circumstances  of  which  are  re- 
lated in  the  history;  and  which  accompanying  circum- 
stances, if  all  or  any  of  them  be  true,  render  it  impossible 
to  have  been  a  delusion.  We  also  find  him  positively, 
and  in  appropriated  terms,  asserting  that  he  himself 
worked  miracles,  strictly  and  properly  so  called,  in  sup- 
port of  the  mission  which  he  executed  ;  the  history, 
meanwhile,  recording  various  passages  of  his  ministry, 
which  come  up  to  the  extent  of  this  assertion.  The 
question  is,  whether  falsehood  was  ever  attested  by  evi- 
dence like  this.  Falsehoods,  we  know,  have  found  their 
way  into  reports,  into  tradition,  into  books  ;  but  is  an  ex- 
ample to  be  met  with  of  a  man  voluntarily  undertaking 
a  life  of  want  and  pain,  of  incessant  fatigue,  of  continual 
peril  ;  submitting  to  the  loss  of  his  home  and  country,  to 
stripes  and  stoning,  to  tedious  imprisonment,  and  the  con- 
stant expectation  of  a  violent  death,  for  the  sake  of  car- 
rying about  a  story  of  what  was  false,  and  of  what,  if 
false,  he  must  have  known  to  be  so  ? 

THE    END. 


VALUABLE    BOOKS 

PUBLISHED  BY 

EGBERT  CARTER  '&  BROTHE.,   .  m  BROADWAY. 


NEW     YORK. 


Abi  el'a  (Rev,  Davtd)  Life.    By  his  Nephew,  $ 

Abercromble'a  Contest  and  The  Armor.  33mo. 

Ad.-iin'.s  Three  Divine  Sisters— Faith,  Hope,  fee. 

Advice  to  a  Young  Christian.  By  a  Village 
Pastor.  With  an  Introduction  by  Uev.  Dr. 
Alexander,     I81110. 

Alleine's Gospel Promises,    l-mn.  . 

Life  and  Letters     ISmo, 

Alexander's  Counsels  to  the  Strang.  3Smo.gilt, 

Ancient  History  of  the  Egyptians,  Assyria 
Chaldeans,  Hedes,  Lydlans,  Carthaginians, 
Persians,  Macedonians,  &.c.    4  vols.  ISmo.  - 

Anderson— The  Annals  of  the  English  Bible. 
By  Christopher  Anderson.  Revised,  abridg- 
ed, and  continued  by  Rev.  S.  I.  Prime.  Bvo.  1 

The  Family  Book  ;  or,  The  Genius  and 

Design  of  tin-  I lea  tic  Constitution.    I -mo. 

Australia,  the  Loss  of  the  liri;:,  by  Fire.  l8mo. 

Bagster — The  Genuineness,  Authenticity,  and 
Inspiration  of  the  Sacred  Volume.     12mo.  . 

Baxter's  Saint's  Ilest.     Large  type.     1-tno. 

Call  to  the  Unconverted.     l8mo.  . 

Choice  works.    ISmo.  . 

Bible  Expositor.    IH1110 

Bickersteth'S  Treatise  on  Prayer.     ISmo. 

Treatise  on  the  Lord's  Supper.    ISmo, 

Blunt's  Undesigned  Coincidences  in  the  Writ- 
ings both  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments, 
an  Argument  of  their  Veracity.    Bvo.  .       .  1 

Bogatzky's  Golden  Treasury.     18mO. 

Bolton  (Miss)  Memoir,  or  the  Lighted  Valley, 

Boner's  Night  of  Weeping.    18mo. 

;  Story  of  Grace,    i8mo 

Morning  of  Joy, 

Bonnet's  Family  of  Bethany.     18mo. 

Meditations  on  the  Lord's  Prayer, 

Borrow's  Bible  and  Gypsies  of  Spain.     8vo. 

Boston's  Fourfold  State.     18mo. 

Crook  in  the  Lot.    18mo. 

Brown's  Explication  of  the  Assem.  Catechism, 

Bridges  on  the  Christian  Ministry.    8vo.         .  1 

On  the  Proverbs.    8vo 2 

On  the  <  xix.  Psalm.     New  ed.  8vo.     .  1 

Memoir  Ol  Mary  Jane  Graham,    8vo.  .  1 

Works.    3  vols.,  containing  the  above,  5 

Brown's  Concordance.  New  and  neat  ed.  24mo. 
Do.  gilt  edge, 

Buchanan's  Comfort  in  Affliction.     18mo. 

On  the  Holy  Spirit.     18  mo.  2d  ed. 

Bunbury's  Glory,  and  other  .Narratives,    .         .       25 

Banyan's  Pilgrim's  Progress.  Fine  edition, 
large  type,  with  eight  illustrations  by  How- 
land.    ISmo l  00 

Do.  do.  gilt,  i  no 

Do.  do.  close  type,  18mo.      50 

Jerusalem  Sinner  Saved.     18mo.         .      50 

Greatness  of  the  Soul.    18mo.       .        .      50 


Butler's  Complete  Works.    Hvo.       .        .        31 

Sermons,  alone.     BVO 1 

Analogy,  alone.    P*o 

anil  Wilson's  Analogy.    8vo.        .        .  1 

Burn's  Christian  Fragments.    l8mo. 
Calvin  on  Secret  Providence,    18mo. 

Cameron's  Farmer's  Daughter.     !8mo.    . 

Catechisms— The  Assembly's.     Per  hundred,    1 
Do.  with  Proofs 3 

Brown's  short  Catechism.    Per  hand.    .  1 

Smyth's  Ecclesiastical  Catechism.  ISmo. 

Willlson's  Communicant's.    ISmo. 

Key  to  the  Assembly's  Catechism.  ISmo. 

Work* ;  comprising  his  Sermons,  I 
nal  Thoughts  on  Scripture,  Mi  cellanies,  and 
Remairfs.    3  vols.  12mo.  with  portrait,         .  :'■ 

Original  Thoughts  on  Scripture,  separate,  1 

Charnork's  Choice  Works.    l2mo. 

Chalmers'  Sermons,  enlarged  by  the  addition 
Of  bis    Posthumous  Sermons.     3  vols.  t'vo. 

with  a  Sne  Por trail 3 

I  .  .       .       .  1 

Miscellanies.    8vo.        .       .       .       .  1 

Select  Works;   comprising  the  above. 

4  vols.  8vo.  with  portrait 6 

Evidences  of  ChristiaaRevelation.  2v.  1 

Natural  Theology.    2  vols.  .       .       .1 

Moral  Philosophy,         .... 

Commercial  Discourses, 

— — —  Astronomical  Discourses, 

Christian  Retirement.    ISmo 

Clarke's  Daily  Scripture  Promises,   32mo.  gilt, 
Clark's  Walk  about  /.ion.    12mo.    . 

Pastor's  Testimony,        .... 

Awnkc,  Thou  Sleeper 

Young  Disciple, 

Gathered  Fragments,     .        .        .        .  1 

Experience.  By  the  same  author.  ISmo. 

Colquhoun's  World's  Religion.    18mo.    . 
Commandment  with  Promise.     By  the  author 
of  "The  First  Day  of  the  Week,"  "Guilty 
Tongue,"  &.c.    With  beautiful  illustrations 

by  Howltind.    IGmo 

Cowper — The  Works  of  William  Cowper; 
comprising  his  Life,  Letters,  ami  Poems, 
now  first  collected  by  the  introduction  of 
Cowper's  Private  Correspondence.  Edited 
by  the  Rev.  T.  S.  Grimshaw.  With  numer- 
ous illustrations  on  steel,  and  a  fine  portrait 
by  Ritchie.     1  vol.  royal  Bvo.  .        .3 

Do.  do.  sheep,  3 

Do.  do.  half  mar.  4 

Do.  do.  cloth  extra  gilt.  4 

Do.  do.  mor.  extra,  ."1 

Poetical  Works,  separate.     2  vols. 

Cnmmlng'a  Mess,.;,'  from  God.    l8mo. 
Christ  Receiving  Sinners, 


in 
00 
GO     I 


00 


CARTERS'    PUBLICATIONS. 


Cunningham's  World  without  Souls.     ISmo.  .$    30 
Dale — The  Golden  Psalm;   an  Exposition  of 
the  I'ith  rs.iiin.    By  Rev.  Thos.  Dale,  M.A. 

Davies'  Sermons.  3  vols.  12mo.  .  .  .  2  00 
Davidson's  Connections.  New  ed.  8vo/ .  .  1  50 
David's  Psalms,  in  metre.    Large  type,  ISmo.      75 

Do.  do  gilt  edge,  1  00 

Do.  do.  Turkey  mor.  2  00 

Do.    18mo.,  good  type.        plain  sheep,      38 

Do.        *•  do.  Turkey  mor.  1  25 

Do.  48mo.,  very  neat  pocket  ed.       mor.      25 

Do.        ••  "  "        gilt  edge,      31 

Do.        •'  "  "  tucks,      50 

D'Aubigne's  History  of  the  Reformation.  Cure- 
fully  revised,  with  various  additions  not 
hitherto  published.  4  vols.  ISmo.  half  cloth,  1  50 

Do.  "  "  full  cloth,  1  75 

Do.  "  "     4th  vol.  half  cloth,      38 

Do.  "  "  »      full  cloth,      50 

Do.  "  "    Complete  in  1  vol.  J  00 

Life  of  Cromwell.    12mo.      .        .        .50 

Germany,  England,  and  Scotland,        .      75 

Luther  and  Calvin.    18mo.   ...      25 

Dick's  Lectures  on  Acts.  8vo.  .  .  .  1  50 
Dickinson's  Scenes  from  Sacred  History.  3ded.  1  00 
Doddridge's  Rise  and  Progress.     18mo.    .        .      40 

Life  of  Colonel  Gardiner.    18mo.         .      30 

Duncan's  Sacred  Philosophy  of  Seasons.    4  v.  3  00 

Life  by  his  Son.    With  portrait.     12mo.        75 

Tales  of  the  Scottish  Peasantry.   18mo.  .      50 

Cottage  Fireside.     18mo 40 

(Mrs.)  Life  of  Mary  Lundie  Duncan,        .      50 

Life  of  George  A.  Lundie.     18mo.       50 

Memoir  of  George  B.  Phillips,        .      25 

Erskine's  Gospel  Sonnets.  New  edition,  .  1  00 

English  Pulpit;  a  collection  of  Sermons  by  the 

most  eminent  English  Divines.    8vo.  .       .  1  50 
Fan's  History  of  the  Egyptians.     12mo.  .         .      75 

History  of  the  Persians.    12mo.       .        .      75 

History  of   the    Assyrians,    Chaldeans, 

Medes,  Lydlans,  and  Carthaginians.    12mo.       75 
History  of  the  Macedonians,  the  Selucidu; 

in  Syria,  and  Parthians.  12mo.  ...  75 
Ferguson's  Roman  Republic.  8vo. .  .  .1  50* 
Fisk's  Memorial  of  the  Holy  Land.     With 

steel  plates 1  00 

Fleury's  Life  of  David.  12mo.  ...  CO 
Poster's  I',    ays,  on  Decision  of  Character,  &c. 

Large  type,  fine  edition,  12mo.      ...      75 

Do.  Close  type,  ISmo.      .  .      50 

Essayonfhe  Evils  of  Popular  Ignorance 

Ford's  Decapolis.    18mo 25 

Free  Church  Pulpit;  consisting  of  Discourses 

by  the  most  eminent  Divines  of  the  Free 

Church  of  Scotland.    3  vols.  8vo.         .        .  5  00 
Fry  (Caroline)  The  Listener.    2  vols,  in  one,    1  00 

Christ  our  Law.     ISmo 00 

Sabbath  .Musings.     ]8mo.  ...      40 

The  Scripture  Reader's  Guide.     18mo.    .      30 

Geological  Cosmogony.    By  a  Layman.    18mO.      30 

God  in  the  Storm.     18mo 25 

Graham's  (Miss  Mary . !.,,  Life  and  Works.  8vo.  1  00 

Test  of  Truth,  separate.    IHmo.   .        .      30 

Green — The   Life  of  the  Rev.  Ashbel  Green, 

D.D.,  by  the  Rev.  Dr.  Jones,  of  Philadelphia,  2  00 
Griffith's  Live  while  you  Live.    18mo.    .        .      30 


Haldine's  Exposition  of  Romans.    8vo. 
Hall  (Jos.,  Bishop  of  Exeter,)  Select  Works, 
Hamilton's  Life  in  Earnest,       . 

Mount  of  Olives, 

Harp  on  the  Willows 

Thankfulness, 

Life  of  Bishop  Hall,       . 

The  Happy  Home.    Illustrated,    . 

Life  of  Lady  Colquhoun.  With  portrait, 

Hawker's  Poor  Mau's  Morning  Portion.  12mo. 

"  Evening  Portion,  . 

Zion's  Pilgrim.    ISmo 

Ilervey's  Meditations, 

Hetherington's  Hist,  of  the  Church  of  Scotland, 
Hengstenbcrg's  Egypt  and  the  Books  of  Moses, 

or  the  Books  of  Moses  Illustrated  by  the 

Monuments  of  Egypt.    12mo. 
Henry's  (Matth.)  Method  for  Prayer, 

Communicant's  Companion, 

Daily  Communion  with  God,        . 

• Pleasantness  of  a  Religious  Life, 

Choice  Works.     ISmo 

Henry  (Philip)  Life  of.    18mo. 

Hill's  (George)  Lectures  on  Divinity.    Svo.    . 

(Rowland)  Life.    By  Sidney.     I2mo. 

History  of  the  Puritans  in  England,  and  tbc 

Pilgrim  Fathers.   By  the  Rev.  W.  H.Stowell 

and  D.  Wilson,  F.S.A.     With  2  steel  plates, 
History  of  the  Reformation  in  Europe.     18mo. 
Housman's  Life  and  Remains.     12mo.     . 
Home's  Introduction.  2  v.  royal  8vo.  half  cloth, 

Do.  1  vol.  sheep,  . 

Do.  2  vols,  cloth,   . 

Do.  2  vols,  library  style, 

(Bishop)  Commentary  on  the  Psalms,  . 

Howard  (John)  or  the  Prison  World  of  Europe, 
Howell's  Life— Perfecl  Peace.    18mo.      . 
Howe's  Redeemer's  Tears,  anil  other  Essays, 
Huss'  (John)  Life.     Transl.  from  the  German, 
Jacobus  on  Matthew.    With  a  Harmony, 

—  Questions  on  do.     18mo. 

On  Mark,  Luke,  and  John,     . 

James'  Anxious  Inquirer.    18mo.    . 
True  Christian.     I81110. 

Widow  Directed.     ISmo. 

Janeway's  Heaven  upon  Earth.     12mo. 

Token  for  Children.    18mo. . 

Jay's  Morning  Exercises.     12mo.      . 
Evening  "  ISmo, 

Christian  Contemplated.     18mo. 

Jubilee  Memorial.     ISmo. 

Jerram's  Tribute  to  a  beloved  only  Daughter,  . 
Johnson's Rasselas.    Elegant  edition,     . 
Key  to  the  Shorter  Catechism,     18mo.    . 
Kennedy's  (Grace)  Profession  is  not  Principle, 

Jessy  Allan,  the  Lame  Girl.    18mo.     . 

Kitto's  Daily  Bible  Illustrations.   4  vols.  ISmo. 
Krammacher's  Martyr  Lamb.    i8mo. 
Elijah  the  Tiahblte.    ISmo. 

Last  Days  of  Elishu.     IJ1110. 

Life  in  New  York.     Ltimo 

Lowrle's  Letters  t,>  Saiib  ith  School  Children, 
(Uev.  W.  M.)  Life.  Edited  by  hi 

Lockwood's  Memoir.     By  bis  I'.ith,  1 

Luther's  Commentary  on  Galatian 8.    Bvo. 

Martin's  (Sarah)  Life.     I8mo 


S2  50 

30 
30 
30 
30 
30 
30 
75 
0(1 
GO 
30 
40 
1  50 


40 
40 
30 
30 
00 
50 
2  00 


1  00 
40 
75 

3  50 

4  00 

4  00 

5  00 
1  50 
1  00 

30 
50 
25 
75 
15 

30 
30 
30 
CO 
30 
75 
75 
40 
30 
30 

20 
30 


40 
40 
75 
•Id 
85 
1  50 
40 

1  go 

30 


CARTERS'    PUBLICATIONS. 


CO 

fiU 
GO 

40 
30 
SO 
95 
9  00 
CO 


Sfackay— The  Wyckliffites;    or,  England  in 

(he  15lh  Century 3 

Martyn's  (Henry)  Life.    i2mo. 

Mason's  Essays  00  the  Church.     12mo.  . 

•'         on  BplSOOpMy.      12mo.    . 

Marshall  on  Saactinc  ttlon 

M  irt>  r-i  and  i  'own  inters  of  Scotland.    1 3mo. 

MaK. 'ho  .in  (he  Atonement.    ISmo. 

McCriodell— The  Convent,  ■  Narrative, 
,n  Believing.    ISmo. 

HcGhee  on  the  Bphaslans 

McLeod's  Life  and  Powei  of  True  Godlineee, 

McCheyn< '« (Rev.  Boberi  Murray)  Works.  9v.  :i  00 

Life,  Lectures,  and  Letters,  separate,      I  50 

Sermons,  separate,  .        .        .        .  "2  (Kl 

Familiar  Letters  from  the  Holy  Land,       50 

McFarlane— The  Mountains  of  the  Bible,  their 
Scenes  and  their  Lessons.  With  four  illus- 
trations on  steel.     12mo 75 

Da  do.  extra  gilt,  1  'J5 

Mcikle's  Solitude  Sweetened.     12mu.      .        .      CO 

Miller's  (Rev.  Ur.S.j  Memoir  of  Rev.  Dr.  Nisbel      75 

(Rev.  John)  Design  of  the  Church, 

Michael  Kemp,  the  Farmer's  Lad.     ldmo. 

Missions,  The  nristin  and  History  of.  By 
Choules  and  Smith.     With  25  steel  plates, 

Mi. [fit's  Southern  Africa.     l2mo.     . 

Mound's  Lucilla  ;  or,  the  Reading  of  the  Bible, 

More  (Hannah)— The  Book  of  Private  Devo- 
tion.   Large  type,  elegant  edition,  ltfmo. 

Do.  do.  do.  gilt, 

Do.     x        do.  small  ed.  32mo. 

Do.  do.  "  gilt, 

Morcll's  Historical  and  Critical  View  of  tho 
Speculative  Philosophy  of  Europe  in  the 
19th  Century 3  00 

Murphy— The  Bible  Consistent  with  Geology, 

My  School  Boy  Days.    18mo.  . 

My  Youthful  Companions.     18mo.  . 
The  above  two  bound  in  1  vol. 

Newton's  (Rev.  John)  Works.    2  vols.  8vo, 

Life,  separate.     18mo.  . 

Memoir  of  M.  Magdalen  Jasper,    . 

Noel's  Infant  Piety,     ISmo. 

North  American  Indians.     Illustrated.    18mo 
-  Counsels  for  the  Impenitent, 

<'ld  White  Meeting-House.     18mo. 

i  )ui  Humphrey's  Observations, 

Addresses,      .... 

Thoughts  for  the  Thoughtful, 

Homely  Hints, 

Walks  in  London, 

Country  Strolls, 

Old  Sea  Captain,     . 

Grandparents, 

Isle  of  Wight, 

Pithy  Papon, 

Pleasant  Tales, 

|  v  ■■  on  Lying.     New  edition,  lc'mo. 

Owen  on  Spiritual  MiodednaOS.     1  HBO, 

Paley'a  Dora;  Paulina',     l.'ino. 

,.il  Letters.    Edited 

Thoughts  on  Religion.    ISmo. 

Pat.  rsun  ,m  tho  Assemb.  shorter  Catechism,  .      5" 

Pike's  True  Happiness,    i-'mo.        ...     30 

Religion  and  Eternal  Life.     l?ino.    .        .      30 


CO 

40 

3  50 
75 
40 

50 

75 
•jo 
30 


30 
30 
5(1 
3  00 
30 
30 
25 
50 
50 
40 
40 
40 
40 
40 
40 
40 
40 
40 
40 
40 
•in 
40 

t;o 

:;. 

1    (M) 


Pike's  Divine  Origin  of  Christianity.    18mo.    $    30 
Philip's  Devotional  Guides.    2  vols.  ISmo.     .  1  50 

Marys 40 

Marthas 40 

Lydias 40 

Hannahs, 40 

Love  of  the  Spirit 40 

Young  Man's  Closet  Library,  .    •  .       .75 

Pollok's  Coarse  of  Time.    The  most  elegant 

edition  ever  published  ;    printed  on  super- 
fine paper.     l6mo.  with  portrait,  cloth,         .  1  00 

gilt,  cloth,  extra 1  50 

Turkey  morocco,  gilt,     .       .       .2  no 

Small  c  ipy,  close  type,  ISmo.        .      40 

Life,  Letters,  and  Remains.    By  the  Rev. 

James  Scott,  b.D.    With  Portrait,  lama,     .  1  00 
Tales  of  the  Sc  ttlsh  Covenanters.    Print- 
ed on  large  paper,  uniform  with  the  a' 
With  portrait 75 

Do.  do.  small  copy,  13mo,      50 

Helen  of  the  Glen.     Hmo.        ...      25 

Persecuted  Family.     I81110.       ...      25 

Ralph  Gemmell.    ISmo 25 

Porteus'  Lectures  on  Matthew.     ISmo.    .        .      CO 
Psalms  in  Hebrew.     Neat  miniature  edition, 

Reign  of  Grace.    By  Booth 

Retrospect,  The.     By  Aliipiis.    ISmo.     .        .      40 
Richmond's  Domestic  Portraiture.     Edited  by 

Bickersteth.     New  and  elegant  edition,       .      75 

Annals  of  the  Poor,     leino.  ...      40 

Rogers'  Jacob's  Well.     ISmo 40 

Romaine  on  Faith.     ISmo CO 

Letters.     ISmo CO 

Rowland's  Common  Maxims  of  Infidelity,      .      75 
Rutherford's  Letters.    New  edition,  Svo. 
Scott's  Force  of  Truth.     ISmo.  ...      25 

Scougal's  Works.     18mo.  40 

Scripture  Narratives.    By  Dr.  Belcher.    12mo.      CO 
Select  Works  of  James,  Venn.  Wilson,  Philip 

and  Jay.     Eight  complete  works  in  1  vol.    .  1  50 
Select  Christian  Authors;  comprising  Dodd- 
ridge,   Wilhcrforce,     Adams,    Halyliiirton, 
a  Keinpis,  &c.     With  Introductory  Essays 
by  Dr.  Chalmers,  Bishop  Wilson,  fcc,     2  v.  2  00 
Serle's  Christian  Remembrancer,     ...      50 

Sinner's  Friend,     ISmo 25 

EHgourney  (Mrs.  L.  II.)  Water  Drops.    2d  edit.     50 

The  Girl's  Book.    18mo.,  illustrated,    .      40 

The  Boy's  Book.  "  •'  .      40 

Child's  Book.    Square,  "  .      35 

Sinclair's  Modern  Accomplishments,        .        .      75 

Modern  Society 75 

Charlie  Seymour.    ISmo.     .       .  30 

Hill  and  Valley.     l'Jmo.         ...      75 

Simeon's  Life,  by  Cams.  With  Introductory 
Essay  by  Bishop  MeDvaine.    With  portrait,  2  00 

Sir  Roland  AshtOO.    By  Lady  Catharine  Long,       75 
Bkatches  of  Sermons  on  the  Parables  ami  Mir- 
acles of  Christ.     Bj  the  author  of  the  Pulpit 

Cyclopaedia.    I9mn 73 

Smyih's  Bereaved  Parents  ConsaM.    J2mo. .     75 
Sorrowing  Yet  ReJ  Icing.    ISmo.     ...     30 
Do.  do  32nio.  gilt.     1.        .30 

Bprlng  Bev.  Gardiner,  D.D.  — A  Pastor's  Tri- 
bute to  one  of  his  Flock,  '.r  Memoirs  of  the 
late  Hannah  L.  Murray.     With  a  portrait,  .  1  50 


CARTERS'    PUBLICATIONS. 


Stevenson's  Christ  on  the  Cross,    liiino.  $    75 

Lord  our  Shepherd.     12mo.  ...      60 

Sumner's  Exposition  of  Matthew  and  Mark,  .  75 
Suddard's  Critish  Pulpit.  2  vols.  8vo.  .  .  3  00 
Symington  on  the  Atonement.  12mo.  .  .  75 
Tacitus' Works  translated.  Edited  by  Murphy,  2  00 

Tennent's  Lite.    18mo 25 

Tholuck's  Circle  of  Human  Life.  18mo.  .  30 
Taylor's  (Jane)  Life  and  Correspondence,       .      40 

Contributions  of  Q.  (A.  New  edition,  with 

fine  illustrations  by  Howland,  2  vols,  in  one, 

Original  Poems.    18mo 30 

Display,  a  Tale.     18mo.     ....      30 

Mother  and  Daughter 30 

Essays  in  Rhyme.    18mo.         ...      30 

Original  Poems  and  Poetical   Remains. 

With  12  fine  illustrations  by  Howland,         .      40 
(Isaac)  Loyola ;  or,  Jesuitism  in  its  Rudi- 
ments,      1  00 

Natural  History  of  Enthusiasm.    12mo.  .      75 

(Jeremy)  Sermons.  Complete  in  1  vol.    .  1  50 

Turre tine's  Complete  Works,  in  original  Latin, 
The  Theological  Sketch  Book ;  or,  Skeletons 
of  Sermons,  so  arranged  as  to  constitute  a 
complete  body  of  Divinity.  From  Simeon, 
Hannam,  Benson,  &c.  2  vols.  .  .  .  3  00 
Tyng's  Lectures  on  the  Law  and  Gospel.  New 
edition,  large  type,  with  a  fine  portrait,  8vo.  1  50 

Christ  is  All.    8vo.  with  portrait,  .  1  50 

Israel  of  God.    8vo.  enlarged  edition,  .  1  50 

Recollections  of  England.    12mo.         .100 

Thucydidcs'   History  of   the    Peloponnesian 
War.    Translated  by  William  Smith.    8vo.  1  25 


Turnbull's  Genius  of  Scotland;  or  Sketches 
of  Scottish  Scenery,  Literature,  and  Relig- 
ion. New  ed.  with  8  fine  illustrations,  16mo. 
Pulpit  Orators  of  France  and  Switzer- 
land, with  Sketches  of  their  Character  and 
Specimens  of  their  Eloquence.  With  por- 
trait of  Fenelon,      $1  00 

Waterbury's  Book  for  the  Sabbath.     ISmo.     .      40 
Whately's  Kingdom  of  Christ  and  Errors  of 

Romanism, 75 

Whitecross'  Anecdotes  on  Assem.  Catechism,      3d 
White's  (Hugh)  Meditation  on  Prayer.    I8mo,      40 

Believer;  a  Series  of  Discourses.  18mo.      4<i 

Practical  Reflections  on    the    Second 

Advent.     18mo 40 

(Henry  Kirke)  Complete  Works.  With 

Life  by  Southey.    8vo 1  50 

Do.  extra  gilt,      .        .        .  2  50 

Wilson's  Lights  and  Shadows  of  Scottish  Life,      50 
Do.  on  large  paper,  lGmo.  with  8  illus- 
trations, from  original  drawings,  byCroome, 
Billings,  fee.,  engraved  by  Howland,    ...      75 

Do.  do.  extra  gilt,  1  25 

Williams  (Rev.  John),  Memoir  of,  Missionary 
to  Polynesia.  By  Eb.  Prout.  With  two  il- 
lustrations, 12mo.  

Winslow  on  Personal  Declension  and  Revival,      60 
Wylie's  Journey  over  the  Region  of  Fulfilled 

Prophecy, 30 

Xenophon's  Whole  Works.    Translated,        .  2  00 
Young's  Night  Thoughts.     Elegant  edition, 

llimo.  with  portrait, 1  00 

Do.  do.  extra  gilt,  1  .">ti 


New  Work  especially  designed  for  the  Family  Circle. 

DAILY   BOl^EniLUSTRATIONS: 

ORIGINAL  READINGS  FOR  A  YEAR, 


StBJECTS    KROM 


SACRED  HISTORY,  BIOGRAPHY,  GEOGRAPHY,  ANTIQUITIES,  AND  THEOLOGY. 
BY  JOHN  KITTO,  D.D.,  F.S.A., 

EDITOR   OF   "TIIK    I'lCTORIAL    BIBLE,"    "  CV(  Lnr.tlilA    OK    B1BLIGA.L    LITERATURE,"   ETC.  ETC. 

Four  Handsome  volumes,    l'imo. 

The  primary  object  of  this  undertaking  is  to  present  ;i  Daily  Course  of  Scriptural 
Reading  and  Reflection  for  one  year.  The  matters  chosen  as  the  subjects  o(  this  course 
are,  in  the  highest  degree,  interesting  in  themselves;  ami,  in  the  mode  of  Betting  them 
forth  before  the  reader,  an  earnest  endeavor  will  be  made  to  introduce  into  the  family 
circlo  a  huge  amount  of  Biblical  Knowledge,  not  usually  acce  rible  but  to  persons  pos- 
sessed of  large  and  curious  libraries;  and  to  present,  in  an  easy  and  unpretending  shape, 
the  real  fruits  of  much  learned  discussion  and  painstaking  research  The  Long  and  careful 
thought  which  the  Author  i-  known  to  have  given  to  Buch  subjects,  and  hi-  intimate  ac- 
quaintance with  the  manners,  customs,  and  ideas  of  the  Eastern  nations  which  most  nearly 
resemble  the  ancient  Hebrews,  will  often,  it  i-  hoped,  be  found  to  throw  much  light  upon 
Scripture  incidents  and  characters,  as  well  as  upon  the  material  facts  which  the  Bible  offers 
io  our  notice. 

Vol.  I.  embraces  Subjects  from  the  Antediluvian  and  Patriarchal  Hist 

Vol.  II.  Subjects  from  the-  History  of  Moses  and  Die  Judges. 

Vol.  III.  Subjects  from  the  History  of  the  Kings. 

VoL  IV.  Subjects  from  the  Qospels  ami  the  Acts. 


BS480.B65  1851 

Undesigned  coincidences  in  the  writings 

Princeton  Theological  Seminary-Speer  Library 


1   1012  00050  8848 


fljrrk 

ill 

•wiM   'tlfljrlfl 

•  !' 

rill' 

n' ii||i  •  i|., 

iMjt''i     !'  : 

tath'iiii'!'  ' 
tn  J.jl  Hi  iij 

j£$    « I 

fflimiL 


